[Python-Dev] PEP 3148 ready for pronouncement

[Jeffrey Yasskin]

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.

> We can discuss naming for all eternity and never reach a point where even
> half of the participants are satisfied.

Agreed. To reduce the length of the discussion, I'm not going to reply
to counter-arguments to my proposal, but I think it'll be useful to
Jesse if people who agree or disagree speak up briefly. I'll reply the
other naming proposals in another message.

Jeffrey