(original) (raw)
Nick did you mean to say "wrap python code around a reentrant lock to create a non-reentrant lock"? Isn't that what PyRLock is doing?
FWIW having now read issues 13697 and 13550, I'm +1 for dropping Python RLock, and all the logging machinery in threading.
--
ಠ_ಠ
2012/1/8 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com>
2012/1/7 Charles-François Natali <neologix@free.fr>:
> Thanks for those precisions, but I must admit it doesn't help me much...
> Can we drop it? A yes/no answer will do it ;-)
The yes/no answer is "No, we can't drop it".
Even though CPython no longer uses the Python version of RLock in
normal operation, it's still the reference implementation for everyone
else that has to perform the same task (i.e. wrap Python code around a
non-reentrant lock to create a reentrant one).
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
ಠ_ಠ