On Wed, Apr 23, 2003, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Aahz: >> >> Hrm. While I don't want to overload what looks like a simple PEP, I'd >> like some thoughts about how this ought to interact with thread-local >> storage (if at all). There are some modules (notably the BCD module) >> that need to keep track of state on a per-thread basis, but without >> requiring a user of the module to do the work. > > IMO you can do thread-local storage just fine by attaching private > attributes to threading.currentThread(). Agreed -- *if* Jeremy goes for your threading-only solution. If this PEP hooks in at a lower level, that's going to require that everything else built on top of threads work at a lower level, too. Seems to me that this is a good argument for module-level properties, BTW, or we require that all module attributes be set only through functions. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ Why is this newsgroup different from all other newsgroups?
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