Greg Ewing schrieb: >> Please >> try to come up with a patch (e.g. by putting a while(is_tripped) loop >> around the for loop). > > That isn't going to fix it.
Why not? > What's needed is to somehow > atomically test and clear is_tripped at the beginning. How would that help? The case in question was a signal raised inside a signal handler. With my proposed solution, that would be processed in the next while loop; if it is cleared at the beginning, the call will wait for the next CheckSignals invocation. Also, why does it need to clear is_tripped atomically? If it is only cleared if it is set, I see no need to make the test and the clearing atomic. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
