Message297186
| Author | jdemeyer |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Mark.Shannon, deleted0524, erik.bray, jdemeyer, ncoghlan, njs, yselivanov |
| Date | 2017-06-28.14:22:07 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1498659727.67.0.230102218328.issue29988@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> It seems like that does at least try to guarantee that a signal can't interrupt between: > > lock.acquire() > try: > ... Actually, I think it's between the end of the `try` and the beginning of the `finally` (which is precisely the same place that *breaks* for a with statement). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-06-28 14:22:07 | jdemeyer | set | recipients: + jdemeyer, ncoghlan, njs, Mark.Shannon, erik.bray, yselivanov, deleted0524 |
| 2017-06-28 14:22:07 | jdemeyer | set | messageid: <1498659727.67.0.230102218328.issue29988@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2017-06-28 14:22:07 | jdemeyer | link | issue29988 messages |
| 2017-06-28 14:22:07 | jdemeyer | create | |