Raymond Hettinger added the comment:
I think it would be better to put this in the ASPN recipes cookbook to let it
mature and gather a following. Right now, it is not at all clear that this is
the right thing to do.
--
resolution: -> rejected
status: open -> closed
versions: -Pytho
Ben Bass added the comment:
'connectionless' is from how I see it as an analogy with UDP (vs TCP);
why not just use a deque is primarily about having the same API - a
client (getter) of the queue shouldn't know or care whether it is a
'lossy' queue or a normal queue. I guess most uses of a n
Raymond Hettinger added the comment:
I'm curious about your "many applications would benefit from
'connectionless' queues". What do you have in mind? Is there any
reason those apps cannot use collections.deque() directly?
--
assignee: -> rhettinger
nosy: +rhettinger
New submission from Ben Bass :
Many applications would benefit from 'connectionless' queues, i.e. they
don't want to care whether anything is reading from the other end.
Using current queue module classes this is not practical, because there
is a choice between unbounded memory consumption or
