Greg Ewing wrote:
> Christian Tismer <tismer@tismer.com>:
...
>>But auto-scheduled frames are a diffeent kind
>>of thing than those which are in "waiting for data"
>>state. I need to distinguish them or I will crash.
>>
>
> If you get rid of the idea of passing values between tasklets as part
> of the switching process, then this distinction disappears. I think
> that value-passing and tasklet-switching are orthogonal activities and
> would be better decoupled.
Hmm, first I thought you were wrong:
Any Python function that calls something, may it be a stackless
schedule function or something else, expects a value to
be returned. Always and ever.
But when I have a scheduler counter built into the Python
interpreter loop, then a schedule will happen *between*
opcodes. Such a frame is not awaiting data, and therefor
not suitable to be switched to by one which is in data
transfer.
Now I see it: You mean I can make this schedule function behave
like a normal function call, that accepts and drops a dummy
value? In fact, this would make all tasklets compatible.
thinking - thanks - chris
--
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer@tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Kaunstr. 26 : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14163 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
PGP Fingerprint E182 71C7 1A9D 66E9 9D15 D3CC D4D7 93E2 1FAE F6DF
where do you want to jump today? http://www.stackless.com/
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