Jim Jewett <jimjjew...@gmail.com> added the comment: On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:32 PM, R. David Murray <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> added the comment: > I, on the other hand, would prefer if it were made part of the API contract > that an > error is raised, and to fix any stdlib implementations *of that API* that > don't conform > to that. (That is, locks from other modules may well not follow that API, > and their > documentation should cover their API.) Do you consider it reasonable that all stdlib Locks follow that API, and change to raise either RuntimeError or a subclass? I don't feel comfortable declaring that (not even only for future feature releases), but if you do, or Guido does, or ... etc ... I'll submit patches for at least dummy_threading and logging. -jJ ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14502> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
