From: Vinay Sajip on
On Jun 2, 4:09 am, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it has a pretty good chance of being accepted, too.  The
> publish-subscribe pattern, if you will, seems to have been implemented
> separately in many places.  The logging module in the standard library
> uses something like this.

Only in a very general sense, if you mean the separation of concerns
between loggers and handlers. There isn't a general-purpose pub/sub
infrastructure built into it.

Of course, pub/sub is just one type of message architecture. I would
say that it would be nice to have a Python messaging package which had
pub/sub as one of several different approaches - which is often done
these days using things like RabbitMQ. Are there any such (pure-Python
or Python + C) packages out there which are generally accepted as
being head and shoulders above others in the same category?

It may be too early to bless any one messaging package for the stdlib
- "let a thounsand flowers bloom" and all that. In any case, stdlib
inclusion can be a double-edged sword in terms of backward-
compatibility constraints, leading to reduced developer/maintainer
flexibility going forward.

Regards,

Vinay Sajip
From: Carl Banks on
On Jun 3, 8:46 am, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 4:09 am, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think it has a pretty good chance of being accepted, too.  The
> > publish-subscribe pattern, if you will, seems to have been implemented
> > separately in many places.  The logging module in the standard library
> > uses something like this.
>
> Only in a very general sense, if you mean the separation of concerns
> between loggers and handlers. There isn't a general-purpose pub/sub
> infrastructure built into it.

Which is an implementation of publish-subscribe pattern. I didn't say
or imply it was general purpose. And it doesn't have to be to make a
case for inclusion of a general-purpose implementation in the standard
library.


Carl Banks
From: Vinay Sajip on
On Jun 4, 1:03 am, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> Which is an implementation of publish-subscribe pattern.  I didn't say
> or imply it was general purpose.  And it doesn't have to be to make a
> case for inclusion of a general-purpose implementation in the standard
> library.

It's analogous, but it's not messaging. And I didn't give that as a
reason why there should or shouldn't be a pub/sub module in the
stdlib; my other comments were more relevant in that debate.

Regards,

Vinay Sajip