This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author pitrou
Recipients Arfrever, Jim.Jewett, asvetlov, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, skrah, vstinner
Date 2012-04-01.16:39:05
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1333298039.3449.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <1333297625.14.0.513992446401.issue14417@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> Antoine: I don't think the point of this code is to come up with a
> unit (or other) test for the behavior, but to try to determine
> empirically whether or not this error is likely to be an issue in
> naive production code (whether it is existing 3.x code or stuff ported
> from Python2). Thus the mention of "cheating" (doing things production
> code would not be doing). 
> 
> The answer so far appears to be "no", which is good.

I find this a bit lacking. Production code is used in all kinds of
settings that we didn't simulate here. Besides, a very sporadic bug is
no better than an easily reproduced one. The tracker already has its
share of people pointing at weird sporadic errors in their log files.

> And the answer to that is thus probably no as well, since code likely
> to run into the error is also likely to need locking around the dict
> in question *anyway*.

Depends on the application really.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-04-01 16:39:06pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, gvanrossum, gregory.p.smith, ncoghlan, vstinner, Arfrever, r.david.murray, asvetlov, skrah, Jim.Jewett
2012-04-01 16:39:06pitroulinkissue14417 messages
2012-04-01 16:39:05pitroucreate