On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:56:20PM -0700, Carl Banks wrote: > On Thursday, October 13, 2011 7:16:37 PM UTC-7, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > > What I would expect to happen that all statements within the ooo block > > > may be executed out > > > of order. The block itself waits till all statements are returned before > > > continuing. > > > > Why do you think this needs to be a language statement? > > > > You can have that functionality *right now*, without waiting for a syntax > > update, by use of the multiprocessing module, or a third party module. > > > > http://docs.python.org/library/multiprocessing.html > > http://wiki.python.org/moin/ParallelProcessing > > > > There's no need for forcing language changes on everyone, whether they need > > it or not, for features that can easily be implemented as library code. > > This goes a little beyond a simple threading mechanism, though. It's more > like guidance to the compiler that you don't care what order these are > executed in; the compiler is then free to take advantage of this advice > however it like. That could be to spawn threads, but it could also compile > instructions to optimize pipelining and cacheing. The compiler could also > ignore it. But you can see that, fully realized, syntax like that can do > much more than can be done with library code. > > Obviously that extra capability is a very long way off for being useful in > CPython. > >
While we're at it, let's throw in the register keyword. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
