[Python-Dev] PEP 3148 ready for pronouncement

[Brian Quinlan]

On May 23, 2010, at 9:43 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:

> I think the PEP's overall API is good to go.
>
> On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Brian Quinlan <brian at sweetapp.com>  
> wrote:
>>
>> On 22 May 2010, at 23:59, R. David Murray wrote:
>>> If there is still discussion then perhaps the PEP isn't ready for
>>> pronouncement yet.  At some point someone can decide it is all
>>> bikeshedding and ask for pronouncement on that basis, but I don't
>>> think it is appropriate to cut off discussion by saying "it's  
>>> ready for
>>> pronouncement" unless you want increase the chances of its getting
>>> rejected.
>>
>> Here are the new proposed non-documentation changes that I've  
>> collected (let
>> me know if I've missed any):
>>
>> ...
>
> I propose to rename the Future.result method to Future.get. "get" is
> what Java (http://java.sun.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/Future.html 
> )
> and C++ (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2010/n3092.pdf
> section 30.6.6 para 12) use, and the word "result" doesn't seem
> particularly better or worse than "get" for our purposes, which
> inclines me to stay consistent.

In C++ and Java, there is only one result-retrieving method so "get"  
seems like a reasonable name.

My implementation has a second method .exception(), which returns the  
exception raised by the submitted function (or None if no exception  
was raised). I thought that having multiple getter methods, where one  
is called .get() would be a bit confusing.

But I don't really care so I'm -0.

Cheers,
Brian