Author giampaolo.rodola
Recipients akuchling, djarb, facundobatista, forest, giampaolo.rodola, gvanrossum, intgr, j1m, jafo, josiahcarlson, kevinwatters, mark.dickinson, markb, mcdonc, pitrou, python-dev, r.david.murray, stutzbach, terry.reedy, tseaver
Date 2013-03-08.20:46:22
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1362775582.96.0.308269539127.issue1641@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I'm not sure how many users asyncore has out there nowadays, but if it has to stay in the stdlib then I see some value in adding a scheduler to it because it is an essential component.

If this is still desirable I can restart working on a patch, although I'll have to go through some of the messages posted earlier in this topic and figure how's best to proceed: whether reusing sched.py or write a separate scheduler in asyncore.py.
History
Date User Action Args
2013-03-08 20:46:23giampaolo.rodolasetrecipients: + giampaolo.rodola, gvanrossum, akuchling, terry.reedy, facundobatista, jafo, josiahcarlson, tseaver, mark.dickinson, pitrou, forest, kevinwatters, djarb, stutzbach, markb, r.david.murray, intgr, mcdonc, j1m, python-dev
2013-03-08 20:46:22giampaolo.rodolasetmessageid: <1362775582.96.0.308269539127.issue1641@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-03-08 20:46:22giampaolo.rodolalinkissue1641 messages
2013-03-08 20:46:22giampaolo.rodolacreate