Marcel Keller <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Ivan, > >> For instance, you call what you did a hack - is there a more >> "official" way to do it? > > I call it a hack because of two reasons: > - The maintainer of Twisted doesn't want to implement something > similar upstream.
For those who are not on the Twisted mailing list, the reply is here: http://twistedmatrix.com/pipermail/twisted-python/2009-February/019252.html There Jean-Paul Calderone says that he doesn't believe in a re-entrent reactor, but he does not explain in detail why that it so. My guess is that a generally re-entrent reactor could end up doing a lot of recursion where each recursion step holds unto a local scope and thereby keeps local variables from being reclaimed by the garbage collector. A simple loop does not have that problem, so I can understand why the Twisted guys will want to keep the design as simple as possible. I'll try and write a mail to them to explain our problem in more detail. Maybe your short patch didn't provide enough information when taken out of context. > - It breaks some unit tests. I'm not sure whether it really breaks > functionality or just the unit testing tool of Twisted. Are these VIFF (trial viff) or Twisted (trial twisted) unit tests? In any case, we have to fix this if there in order to keep our sanity :-) > As I said at the meeting, a possibility would be to go multi-threaded. > The Twisted maintainer suggested another way but I don't think that > that way works for us. Do you mean the inlineCallbacks or the coiterate? And why it not work? -- Martin Geisler VIFF (Virtual Ideal Functionality Framework) brings easy and efficient SMPC (Secure Multiparty Computation) to Python. See: http://viff.dk/.
pgppkZQFG2hpI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) [email protected] http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
