[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > yes, I read it, and I even know about threading's existence. I just > thought that if something claims to be atomic, it better should be.
I think the term "atomic" is meaningful only when the context is known. For example, "atomic" operations in the Python interpreter are certainly not atomic within the larger context of the CPU, and atomic CPU operations are not necessarily atomic in the context of a system with multiple CPUs. If the context for mutex.py explicitly excludes multi-threading then you have to interpret "atomic" in whatever context that defines. -Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
