On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 23:06 -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > +1 on the idea, -1000 on the name. It's neither atomic nor a > transaction. I believe that "critical section" is a more common term for > what you're proposing. > > Probably the primitive could be placed in the thread or threading module, > so that it would be something like: > > with threading.critical_section(): > # ... Or even <shudder> threading.synchronized(). But in any event, +1 on the idea and on sticking the primitive in threading. > It might be nice to be able to escape out of the critical section using a > nested with: statement, as this would allow you to treat much of a program > as single-threaded, and then selectively allow task switching. But I'm not > sure what you'd call that API. :) threading.unsynchronize()? Yikes. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 309 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060314/715a3fb8/attachment.pgp
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