Nick did you mean to say "wrap python code around a reentrant lock to create a non-reentrant lock"? Isn't that what PyRLock is doing?
FWIW having now read issues 13697 and 13550, I'm +1 for dropping Python RLock, and all the logging machinery in threading. 2012/1/8 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> > 2012/1/7 Charles-François Natali <neolo...@free.fr>: > > Thanks for those precisions, but I must admit it doesn't help me much... > > Can we drop it? A yes/no answer will do it ;-) > > The yes/no answer is "No, we can't drop it". > > Even though CPython no longer uses the Python version of RLock in > normal operation, it's still the reference implementation for everyone > else that has to perform the same task (i.e. wrap Python code around a > non-reentrant lock to create a reentrant one). > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia > -- ಠ_ಠ
_______________________________________________ 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
