On Feb 26, 12:04 pm, Jeff Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Feb 26, 11:37 am, Jeff Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> On Feb 26, 10:59 am, Preston Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> On Feb 26, 1:45 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>>>> Two options occurred to me, which the first showed up in the earlier > >>>>> extremely skeletal and cryptic post: > >>>> Perhaps you would be more likely to get the kind of help you seem to > >>>> want > >>>> if you refrained from posting "cryptic and skeletal" messages. The > >>>> fact that many > >>>> other people have pointed this out to you as of late would tend to > >>>> suggest > >>>> you are trolling, i.e. intentionally trying to foster miscommunication > >>>> and threads > >>>> that do nothing to advance anyones understanding. > >>>> And regarding your other recent post about trying to find a "solution" > >>>> to the "problem" > >>>> of immutable types... Due to the above reasons you are unlikely to > >>>> influence the > >>>> design of the core language with half-baked stream of consciousness > >>>> ramblings. These > >>>> belong in your LiveJournal, not in c.l.python. > >>>> If you have a problem you need help with, please read this entire > >>>> document about 3 times > >>>> before posting anything else: > >>>>http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > >>>> Specifically this: > >>>>http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#beprecise > >>>> and this: > >>>>http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#goal > >>> Ugh, very well. You call for an explanation. > >>> Back home, the original post would be interesting, so I wrote it. > >>> Whatever reactions other people have to them is information that is > >>> unavailable to me. I don't know you. I'm rather irked by a > >>> proportion of posts, but for my part, it's hard to get me to point a > >>> finger. > >>> I am not a troll. I want a sustainable, healthy, productive, > >>> educational, informative relationship with frequenters of c.l.p, the > >>> Python community at large, and anyone who has anything non-negative to > >>> contribute. If you are wanting to see how I react to hostility, just > >>> ask. I'll fake it for you, but only for a second at a time. > >> Wow. I sure hope I don't come across like castiron does here. > > >>> Now, what help is it that you believe I seem to want? All I asked for > >>> was, ideas. > >> It's a little difficult for me to interpret your code, partly because I > >> am nbt very familiar with Python's support for concurrency. But what > >> are you trying to a achieve? > > >> You mentioned: "I recently ran into a case (* would that be helpful to > >> describe here?) where thread1 had to do something, thread2 had to do > >> something after that, and thread1 had to wait for that, then do > >> something else, and thread2 again had to wait before starting the first > >> thing again." > > >> This is ordinarily called a Producer-Consumer model. It is often > >> implemented using semaphores. Googling "python semaphore" turns up this > >> documentation: > > >>http://www.python.org/doc/lib/semaphore-objects.html > > >> That page, in turn, links to an example of the proper use of semaphores > >> in Python. Does that help?- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Hi Jeff. I've enjoyed your recent posts. > > > I'm not quite sure a semaphore is exactly the synchronization object > > I'm looking for, but I'm a little new to concurrency myself. > > > In the interface I design, only one with-call can get the result at > > once. It was my understanding that semaphores, and many other synch. > > objs. returned control at random. > > I take this to mean that your interface offers a function returns > immediately, rather than waiting for the work to complete. Is that correct? > > > In fact, in the background, I'm working on something a little more > > substantial than this, but it's not done, so the only review of it I > > can perform is of its interface. > > The interface is (in my opinion) usually the best place to start the > code, anyway. > > > If someone has a "yes, but in half the lines, at twice the speed," > > then tear my posts to shreds. > > It is not quite clear what your code is intended to do. That doesn't > mean there's necessarily anything wrong with it, but it's hard for most > Usenetters to take the time to read such long sequences of code. Would > it be possible for you to post a complete program, that we can actually > run? Wherever your code is not yet ready, just put a line or two of > "stub" code, and add a comment to explain what should be happening.- Hide > quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
Sure. And honestly, I have no idea what the best way to go about this is, except keep trying. th1 th2 set cmd run cmd get result acknowledge continue continue th2 won't -run cmd- until th1 completes -set cmd-. th1 won't -get result- until th2 completes -run cmd-. and once -acknowledge- completes, both can go about their merry ways. In the example last night, th2 continued to loop to handle requests in a collection of threads, but th1 had pressing business elsewhere. Dated 05:07 PST, the code should be runnable. But the only thing is, I developed it in Python 3.0a2. In particular, line 71 def thloop( thd ), and line 82 def op100( thd ), should demonstrate that interface. Newsgroups: comp.lang.python From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 05:07:48 -0800 (PST) Local: Tues, Feb 26 2008 7:07 am Subject: Re: is there enough information? The interface is an awesome place to start. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list