Christian Tismer wrote:
>
> "M.-A. Lemburg" wrote:
> ...
> > Also, has anybody considered writing list.pop(..,default) this way:
> >
> > if list:
> > obj = list.pop()
> > else:
> > obj = default
> >
> > No exceptions, no changes, fast as hell :-)
>
> Yes, that's the best way to go, I think.
> But wasn't the primary question directed on
> an atomic function which is thread-safe?
> I'm not sure, this thread has grown too fast :-)
I think that was what Jim had in mind in the first place.
Hmm, so maybe we're not after lists after all: maybe what
we need is access to the global interpreter lock in Python,
so that we can write:
sys.lock.acquire()
if list:
obj = list.pop()
else:
obj = default
sys.lock.release()
Or maybe we need some general lock in the thread module for these
purposes... don't know. It's been some time since I used
threads.
--
Marc-Andre Lemburg
______________________________________________________________________
Y2000: 162 days left
Business: http://www.lemburg.com/
Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4