[Python-Dev] Re: 2.4a2, and @decorators (original) (raw)

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Wed Aug 4 18:36:09 CEST 2004

At 06:09 PM 8/4/04 +0200, Heiko Wundram wrote:

Am Mittwoch, 4. August 2004 17:17 schrieb Batista, Facundo: > So, all that said, I'm +1 to take this out from 2.4.

-1000 to take it out from 2.4... And +1 on Guido's intuition for choosing the @ syntax (it goes easily for me). I'd love to see something of the following form: class x: synchronized = threading.Synchronizer() @synchronized def y(self): When's threading.Synchronizer coming (just a threading.(R)Lock with an extra call which prepares a method for synchronization with this lock)? I already have some patches which implement module/class/instance locking using just a simple RLock and the decorator syntax, and I'd gladly sign over the patches to the PSF. ;)

Note that your example, if I understand it correctly, creates a single lock for all instances of class 'x', rather than for individual instances of 'x'. This is not what I'd normally expect from a 'synchronized' method.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list