[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Raymond Hettinger added the comment: This does not look like a bug to me. I think this should be closed. -- nosy: +rhettinger ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Changes by Ram Rachum r...@rachum.com: -- status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I don't really know. It simply looks like the default implementation of __reduce_ex__. Is it important? -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Ram Rachum added the comment: I use that to test whether an object is pickleable or not. It used to work in Python 2. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I use that to test whether an object is pickleable or not. It used to work in Python 2. Well, the obvious way to do it would be to call pickle.dumps() on the object, IMO :-) -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Ram Rachum added the comment: Wrong, because the object itself could be pickleable but refer to a different object which is non-pickleable. I want to know whether the object itself, without any object it refers to, is pickleable. Also, pickling an object could be very resource-intensive, depending on its size. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Wrong, because the object itself could be pickleable but refer to a different object which is non-pickleable. I want to know whether the object itself, without any object it refers to, is pickleable. I think you're being too picky. Unless you're manually added stuff to your Lock's attributes, there isn't a practical difference between the two situations. Also, pickling an object could be very resource-intensive, depending on its size. Well, this is a Lock here, not an ISO file. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue19032] __reduce_ex__ on lock object
New submission from Ram Rachum: import threading l = threading.Lock() l.__reduce_ex__(3) (function __newobj__ at 0x026CD8C8, (class '_thread.lock',), None, None, None) Isn't it a bug that `__reduce_ex__` works on the non-pickleable lock object? -- components: Library (Lib) messages: 197850 nosy: cool-RR priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: __reduce_ex__ on lock object type: behavior versions: Python 3.3 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue19032 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com