[Python-ideas] channel (synchronous queue)
Sturla Molden
sturla at molden.no
Sun Feb 19 18:36:34 CET 2012
More information about the Python-ideas mailing list
Sun Feb 19 18:36:34 CET 2012
- Previous message: [Python-ideas] channel (synchronous queue)
- Next message: [Python-ideas] channel (synchronous queue)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Den 19.02.2012 18:27, skrev Sturla Molden: > Den 19.02.2012 18:18, skrev Antoine Pitrou: >> This begs the question: what does it achieve? You know that the data >> has been "received" on the other side (i.e. get() has been called), >> but this doesn't tell you anything was done with the data, so: why is >> this an useful way to synchronize? > > I think it achieves nothing, except making deadlocks more likely. Which is to say, I just wanted to prove how ridiculously simple Matt Joiner's complaint about a "channel" was. The multiprocessing barrier on the other hand is quite useful. (Though the butterfly method is not the most efficient implementation of a barrier.) Sturla
- Previous message: [Python-ideas] channel (synchronous queue)
- Next message: [Python-ideas] channel (synchronous queue)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-ideas mailing list