A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-May/015076.html below:

[Python-Dev] Killing threads

[Python-Dev] Killing threads [Python-Dev] Killing threadsTim Peters tim.one@home.com
Mon, 28 May 2001 21:49:29 -0400
[Aahz]
> (This got brought up because I experimented with os._exit() as a
> possible solution, but that GPFs on Win98SE.)

[TIm]
> Please open a bug report on that, then, with a tiny test case
> if possible.
> This worked fine on Win98SE for me just now:

[Aahz]
> Futz.  *Now* it works.  <sigh>

Now *what* works?  The test case I posted, or the original test case you
tried (which you didn't post)?

> Chalk it up to another unreproducible bug caused by an unstable Win98.

Actually doubt it -- threads are very reliable on Win98, despite that little
else is (malloc() is flaky, popen() is a nightmare, etc).

Here's a recent bug report on a Red Hot box that may be related:

http://sf.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=105470&func=detail&aid=426735

I have no idea what's supposed to happen if you call os._exit from a
*spawned* thread (perhaps that's what you did too?  I did not) -- threads
are outside the scope of the C std, so I suppose it's a x-platform
crapshoot.




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