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 kristjan.jonsson
Recipients Sebastian.Noack, asvetlov, christian.heimes, jyasskin, kristjan.jonsson, mklauber, neologix, pitrou, sbt
Date 2012-10-02.09:51:19
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
> You are not restricted to the context manager model.  Just use selock.shared.acquire() or selock.exclusive.acquire().

The unlock operation is the same, so now you have to arbitrarily pick one of the "lockd" and chose release().  Why take a construct which is essentially a lock that can be acquired in two different ways and force people to view it as separate objects?

I much prefer a simple RWLock primitve, such as is popular in other programming environments, and add your convenient pseudo-locks on top.
That way, we are not forcing a certain myopic view of what an RWLock is down people's throat.
Date User Action Args
2012-10-02 09:51:20kristjan.jonssonsetrecipients: + kristjan.jonsson, pitrou, christian.heimes, jyasskin, asvetlov, neologix, sbt, mklauber, Sebastian.Noack
2012-10-02 09:51:20kristjan.jonssonsetmessageid: <>
2012-10-02 09:51:20kristjan.jonssonlinkissue8800 messages
2012-10-02 09:51:19kristjan.jonssoncreate