Message315968
| Author | pdgoins-work |
|---|---|
| Recipients | eryksun, neologix, paul.moore, pdgoins-work, pitrou, steve.dower, tim.golden, tim.peters, tupl, vstinner, zach.ware |
| Date | 2018-04-30.21:32:42 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1525123962.86.0.682650639539.issue21822@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> I think adding polling to such a widely-used primitive is out of question. I'm guessing this is because of the perceived performance impact? (That's the main thought I have against polling in this case.) Or is it something else? I can certainly look at tweaking the 3 mutex implementations I mentioned previously, but I do expect that will be a bit more code; I at least wanted to put the "simpler" idea out there. Fully knowing that "simpler" isn't necessarily better. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2018-04-30 21:32:42 | pdgoins-work | set | recipients: + pdgoins-work, tim.peters, paul.moore, pitrou, vstinner, tim.golden, neologix, zach.ware, eryksun, steve.dower, tupl |
| 2018-04-30 21:32:42 | pdgoins-work | set | messageid: <1525123962.86.0.682650639539.issue21822@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018-04-30 21:32:42 | pdgoins-work | link | issue21822 messages |
| 2018-04-30 21:32:42 | pdgoins-work | create | |