[Python-Dev] usefulness of Python version of threading.RLock (original) (raw)

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Thu Jan 5 23:17:18 CET 2012

On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:02:42 -0700 Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently at gmail.com> wrote:

2012/1/5 Charles-François Natali <neologix at free.fr>: > Hi, > > Issue #13697 (http://bugs.python.org/issue13697) deals with a problem > with the Python version of threading.RLock (a signal handler which > tries to acquire the same RLock is called right at the wrong time) > which doesn't affect the C version. > Whether such a use case can be considered good practise or the best > way to fix this is not settled yet, but the question that arose to me > is: "why do we have both a C and Python version?". > Here's Antoine answer (he suggested to me to bring this up on python-dev": > """ > The C version is quite recent, and there's a school of thought that we > should always provide fallback Python implementations. > (also, arguably a Python implementation makes things easier to > prototype, although I don't think it's the case for an RLock) > """ > > So, what do you guys think? > Would it be okay to nuke the Python version? > Do you have more details on this "school of thought"?

>From what I understand, the biggest motivation for pure Python versions is cooperation with the other Python implementations. See http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0399/

Apologies, I didn't remember it was written down in PEP. A bit more than a school of thought, then :-)

Regards

Antoine.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list