On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 09:56:19 -0700
Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
>
> > For timeout purposes in a single process, such a clock is useful. It just
> > isn't suitable for benchmarks, or for interprocess coordination.
>
> I think it would be better if the proposed algorithm (or whatever
> algorithm to "fix" timeouts) was implemented by the
> application/library code using the timeout (or provided as a separate
> library function), rather than by the clock, since the clock can't
> know what fallback behavior the app/lib needs.
Agreed with providing it as a separate library function.
Regards
Antoine.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com
Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
>
> > For timeout purposes in a single process, such a clock is useful. It just
> > isn't suitable for benchmarks, or for interprocess coordination.
>
> I think it would be better if the proposed algorithm (or whatever
> algorithm to "fix" timeouts) was implemented by the
> application/library code using the timeout (or provided as a separate
> library function), rather than by the clock, since the clock can't
> know what fallback behavior the app/lib needs.
Agreed with providing it as a separate library function.
Regards
Antoine.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com