Re: PEP 444 feature request - Futures executor
"P.J. Eby" <pje-Wh6+Hckhi6HFNGf7iClzIwC/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.web |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 09:11 PM 1/10/2011 -0600, Timothy Farrell wrote:
>PJ,
>
>You seem to be old-hat at this so I'm looking for a little advise as
>I draft this spec. It seems a bad idea to me to just say
>environ['wsgi.executor'] will be a wrapped futures executor because
>the api handled by the executor can and likely will change over
>time. Am I write in thinking that a spec should be more specific in
>saying that the executor object will have "these specific methods"
>and so as future changes, the spec is not in danger of invalidation
>due to the changes?
I'd actually just suggest something like:
future = environ['wsgiorg.future'](func, *args, **kw)
(You need to use the wsgiorg.* namespace for extension proposals like
this, btw.)
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/gcpw-web-sig%40m.gmane.org