RetroSearch Browse

Sun May 6 19:58:10 CEST 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-May/119301.html

On 06/05/2012 5:07pm, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sun, 06 May 2012 17:56:55 +0200
>> summary:
>>    Make AcquirerProxy.acquire() support timeout argument
>
> Should it have a Misc/NEWS entry? (and a doc addition perhaps?)

Since proxies for locks/semaphores are supposed to work the same way as 
the proxied object from threading, one could argue that the lack of 
support in 3.2 was a bug.

I notice now that multiprocessing.*.acquire() and threading.*.wait() 
treat negative timeouts as zero timeouts.  On the other hand, 
threading.*.acquire() treat negative timeouts as infinite.

Maybe these inconsistencies should be documented or eliminated?

As currently implemented AcquirerProxy.acquire() treats negative 
timeouts as infinite.

Cheers

Richard

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-May/119301.html below:

Make AcquirerProxy.acquire() support timeout argument