Martin Devera wrote: > Regarding implementation, I wanted to look for some opinions before starting > to > implement something as big as this patch. Probably someone can look and say, > hey > it is stupit, you forgot that.... FILL_IN ... ;-)
If I understand correctly, your suggestion for avoiding deadlock relies on the fact that a given thread can really only have one object locked at a time, i.e. after you LOCK an object you can only assume you own it until you LOCK another object or return to some quiescent state. Is this right? If so, the question is whether it's sufficient to be able to lock just one object at a time. Maybe it is, but some more formal consideration of that might be a good idea. -- Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | Carpe post meridiem! | Christchurch, New Zealand | (I'm not a morning person.) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
