No need for comma in "which one of the waiting threads proceeds is not defined, and may vary across implementations."

"Once a thread has acquired a lock, subsequent attempts to acquire it block, until it is released; any thread may release it" should read "are blocked" instead of "block."


/Documents/python/cpython/Doc/build/html/library/threading.html

submitting a patch for both grammar errors

afaik they don't seem to be grammatical errors
"subsequent attempts to acquire it block" - block is the verb, don't see anything wrong
similar example: the crowd blocks me. (present tense)
"which one of the waiting threads proceeds is not defined, and may vary across implementations." - there is only one clause, so no comma needed.
If two separate clauses. are separated a coordinating conjunction (such as and), commas are required afaik.

oops, should be "the crowd blocks me"

Ramachandra, if I understand you correctly, I think what you are saying that both are grammar mistakes and the first one could addressed by adding "s" to block.

I see no problem with both points: "block" is the correct verb form in this context ("attempts" being plural), and the version including comma reads better to me.

I (as a native English speaker, FWIW) agree that the existing text is correct insofar as the reported problems go.  I, however, would remove the comma after 'block'.  I don't know that it is wrong as written, but it reads strangely to my ear.

I'm saying that they aren't valid grammar mistakes (there is no grammar
mistake). I agree with Georg Brandl's comment.

On 27 April 2013 20:18, Andriy Mysyk <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

>
> Andriy Mysyk added the comment:
>
> Ramachandra, if I understand you correctly, I think what you are saying
> that both are grammar mistakes and the first one could addressed by adding
> "s" to block.
>
> ----------
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17851>
> _______________________________________
>