Richard Oudkerk added the comment:
> You cannot associate several conditions to the *inner lock*, because you
> don't have access to them (otherwise I wouldn't open this issue).
Condition.wait_for_any() would create a single inner lock and add it to the
_waiters list for each of the condition variables. notify() and notify_all()
would need to deal with the possibility that releasing the inner lock fails
with ThreadError because it has already been unlocked.
> You may not need to test for a predicate when using .wait() . Only when
> you're
> using .wait_for()
> This is what I'm most interested in mimicking.
(Ignoring timeouts) wait() should be used with the idiom
while <expr>:
cond.wait()
This allows the woken thread to check whether it is really supposed to continue
--
it sounds like you are not doing this. The only advantage of using wait() over
wait_for() is that sometimes it avoids you having to create a named function or
lambda function like in
cond.wait_for(lambda: not (<expr>))
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue18078>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
