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

Matt Joiner anacrolix at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 16:22:15 CET 2012

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.

2012/1/8 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>

2012/1/7 Charles-François Natali <neologix at 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 at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia

-- ಠ_ಠ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120108/e6a25c2b/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list