RetroSearch Browse

Mon Oct 2 22:20:09 EDT 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-October/149711.html

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:42 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
> It's fairly reasonable to implement a mutex using a CSP-style
> unbuffered channel (send = acquire, receive = release). And the same
> trick turns a channel with a fixed-size buffer into a bounded
> semaphore. It won't be as efficient as a modern specialized mutex
> implementation, of course, but it's workable.
>
> Unfortunately while technically you can construct a buffered channel
> out of an unbuffered channel, the construction's pretty unreasonable
> (it needs two dedicated threads per channel).

Yeah, if threading's synchronization primitives make sense between
interpreters then we'll add direct support.  Using channels for that
isn't a good option.

-eric

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-October/149711.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 554 v3 (new interpreters module)