On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 00:07:27 -0500
> PJ Eby wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > > For
> > > instance, combining STM with explicit locking would allow explicit
> > > locking when IO was required,
> > I don't think
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 00:07:27 -0500
> PJ Eby wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> > A suite is marked
>> > as a `transaction`, and then when an unlocked object is modified,
>> > instead of indicating an error, a lock
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 00:07:27 -0500
PJ Eby wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > A suite is marked
> > as a `transaction`, and then when an unlocked object is modified,
> > instead of indicating an error, a locked copy of it is created to be
> > used through the rest of th
(I've added back python-ideas, because I think that is still the
appropriate forum.)
> A new
> suite type - the ``transaction`` will be added to the language. The
> suite will have the semantics discussed above: modifying an object in
> the suite will trigger creation of a thread-local shallow
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> STM is a relatively new technology being experimented with in newer
> languages, and in a number of 3rd party libraries (both Peak [#Peak]_
> and Kamaelia [#Kamaelia]_ provide STM facilities).
I don't know about Kamaelia, but PEAK's STM (part
PEP: XXX
Title: Interpreter support for concurrent programming
Version: $Revision$
Last-Modified: $Date$
Author: Mike Meyer
Status: Draft
Type: Informational
Content-Type: text/x-rst
Created: 11-Nov-2011
Post-History:
Abstract
The purpose of this PEP is to explore strategies for makin
