Message291009
| Author | tim.peters |
|---|---|
| Recipients | eryksun, jnoller, mallyvai, pakal, tim.peters |
| Date | 2017-04-02.00:50:20 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1491094221.34.0.396503778247.issue5906@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
@Eryk, not me ;-) I find the "daemonic or not?" distinction useless for processes - it just gets in the way at times (e.g., a Pool worker dies with an assert(!) error if it tries to create its own Pool for something). I don't care about orphans either. It's one reason `concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor` is sometimes more attractive (it has no "daemon" concept, the processes it creates don't vanish midstream at sometimes surprising times, and neither do they refuse to create additional cf process pools). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-04-02 00:50:21 | tim.peters | set | recipients: + tim.peters, jnoller, pakal, mallyvai, eryksun |
| 2017-04-02 00:50:21 | tim.peters | set | messageid: <1491094221.34.0.396503778247.issue5906@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2017-04-02 00:50:21 | tim.peters | link | issue5906 messages |
| 2017-04-02 00:50:20 | tim.peters | create | |