Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes: >> > Hm, that's not bad. It should be called sys.interrupt_main() then. >> >> Works for me! >> >> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=753733&group_id=5470&atid=305470 > > Hm, but since this only makes sense if you have threads, shouldn't it > be in the thread extension module? Also, you forgot the patch to > idlelib/run.py. :-) Oh, I did that when I tested sys.interrupt_main() :-) But not checked in until I saw whether the patch would stick. > If this makes sense to you, just check it in. It sounds to me like thread.interrupt_main() is the way to go for now. That naming makes the limitation evident. If there should be a subsequent generalization to the implementation, it's no problem to update IDLE's run.py if thread.interrupt_main() gets deprecated. I'll post a revision to the patch. __ KBK
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