Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > Supose you have a a pure C functions (I mean, no Py stuff), perhaps > even declared 'with gil' in its signature... Now suppose that > function access some global variables, then we would be able to get > some sort of (global) locking using a 'with gil' block. Am I being > clear? Do this make sense? Would this be useful?
Hmmm... you'd be creating a third kind of state, as well as 'gil held' and 'gil not held', there would be 'gil held but you're still not allowed to mess with Python stuff in this function'. Sounds a bit messy to me. It would be better to create an intermediate function declared 'with gil' and call that from the nogil function. Then the intermediate function will run with the gil held. Also, I wouldn't like to build in a language feature whose only purpose in life is to enable abusing the gil for non-python purposes. A 'with gil' block ought to deliver all that it seems to promise, or not be there. -- Greg _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
