10.05.22 18:12, Barney Stratford пише:
This has a couple of advantages. I don’t have to import the threading module
all over my code. I can use the neater syntax of function calls. The function’s
definition makes it clear it’s returning a new thread since it’s decorated. It
gets the plumbing o
On 12May2022 20:17, Barney Stratford wrote:
>It seems like the consensus is that this is a good idea, but it’s the
>wrong good idea. Should I cancel the PR or should we try to make it
>into a better good idea?
Why not shift slightly? As remarked, having a function automatically
spawn threads c
It’s definitely too early for a PR, so if you already have one (I didn’t
see one linked to this thread) please close it.
Then once we’ve bikeshedded the right good idea you can start a new PR.
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 12:21 Barney Stratford
wrote:
> It seems like the consensus is that this is a
It seems like the consensus is that this is a good idea, but it’s the wrong
good idea. Should I cancel the PR or should we try to make it into a better
good idea?
Cheers,
Barney.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send
On Tue, 10 May 2022 16:12:13 +0100
Barney Stratford wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> It occurs to me that creating threads in Python is more awkward than it needs
> to be. Every time I want to start a new thread, I end up writing the same
> thing over and over again:
>
> def target(*args, **kwds):
>
