> below is quite fast for most reasonable numbers of threads - it does > wake all threads up that were waiting, but I find it considerably clearer, > and can be done with a single synchronization primitive. Oh, by adding a second Condition(), you don't need to notify everyone and can replace the 'while' uses with 'if'. Even faster. One thing that bothered me about using the three mutexes as given in Queue.Queue is that it relies on the fact that a thread can unlock an underlying thread.lock that it didn't acquire. To me, this is strange behavior. - Josiah
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