My 2 cent's worth, don't even think about it.
On Apr 15, 2017 3:27 AM, "Serhiy Storchaka" wrote:
> On 15.04.17 11:55, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
>> Serhiy Storchaka writes:
>>
>> > The first thread just sets the running flag (as in current code). Due
>> to
>> > GIL this doesn't need addition
On 15.04.17 11:55, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Serhiy Storchaka writes:
> The first thread just sets the running flag (as in current code). Due to
> GIL this doesn't need additional synchronization.
Can we assume this lack of additional synchronization for other
implementations? If not, do we
On 15 April 2017 at 02:47, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> When use a generator from different threads you can get a ValueError
> "generator already executing". Getting this exception with the single thread
> is a programming error, it in case of different threads it could be possible
> to wait until ot
Serhiy Storchaka writes:
> The first thread just sets the running flag (as in current code). Due to
> GIL this doesn't need additional synchronization.
Can we assume this lack of additional synchronization for other
implementations? If not, do we care?
___
