[Python-Dev] threadtools (was Re: Autoloading? (Making Queue.Queue easier to use)) (original) (raw)
Aahz aahz at pythoncraft.com
Thu Oct 13 19:08:17 CEST 2005
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] threadtools (was Re: Autoloading? (Making Queue.Queue easier to use))
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Autoloading? (Making Queue.Queue easier to use)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005, skip at pobox.com wrote:
Given your list of stuff to go in a threadtools module, I still think you need something to hold Lock, RLock, Condition and Semaphore. See my previous post (subject: Threading and synchronization primitives) about a threadutils module to hold these somewhat lower-level sync primitives. In most cases I don't think programmers need them. OTOH, providing some higher level abstractions seems to make sense. (I have to admit I have no idea what a QueueThread's outbox queue would be used for. Queues are generally multi-producer, single-consumer objects. It makes sense for a thread to have an inbox. I'm not so sure about an outbox.)
If you look at my thread tutorial, the spider thread pool uses a single-producer, multiple-consumer queue to feed URLs to the retrieving threads.
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." --Red Adair
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] threadtools (was Re: Autoloading? (Making Queue.Queue easier to use))
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Autoloading? (Making Queue.Queue easier to use)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]