Author r.david.murray
Recipients ezio.melotti, kushal.das, nedbat, neologix, pitrou, r.david.murray, trent, vstinner
Date 2013-05-07.12:34:38
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1367930079.05.0.0490049748478.issue17914@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
As for why to not return 1, I can imagine code that checks cpu_count, and only if it returns the "don't know" result would it invoke some more expensive method of determining the CPU count on platforms that cpu_count doesn't support.  Since the os module is the home for "close to the metal" (well, OS) functions, I agree that it does not make sense to throw away the information that cpu_count can't actually determine the CPU count.  Contrawise, I could see the multiprocessing version returning 1, since it is a higher level API and os.cpu_count would be available for those wanting the "don't know" info.
History
Date User Action Args
2013-05-07 12:34:39r.david.murraysetrecipients: + r.david.murray, pitrou, vstinner, nedbat, trent, ezio.melotti, neologix, kushal.das
2013-05-07 12:34:39r.david.murraysetmessageid: <1367930079.05.0.0490049748478.issue17914@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-05-07 12:34:39r.david.murraylinkissue17914 messages
2013-05-07 12:34:38r.david.murraycreate