4 ms·

In all honesty .subtask() is more readable for me than .s() Also, I don't want Celery to replace asyncio and/or threading. I was trying to point out that the

• asksol 10y ago
  I think it's more readable in isolation, but when you have workflows it distracts you from what it's actually doing, making it harder to see what the purpose is at a glance. An API can probably not have many shortcuts like this, but you learn what .s does once, and then you barely notice it. But that's my opinion and I have come to learn not everybody value succinctness in code, so you have the choice of both :o) Had I not been constrained by backward compatibility I may have made it so that task(arg) only defines the signature of a task invocation and you'd need to do task(arg).delay() to call it remotely, and task(args)() to call it as a function locally.
  • mdomans 10y ago
    Not merely a choice of mine to make - working in a team actually makes .subtask better