Author ncoghlan
Recipients louielu, ncoghlan, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2017-02-25.14:52:10
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1488034330.74.0.151318685231.issue29645@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Nice, this is much cleaner than the current approach!

The one thing I would suggest is a new test case that:

- asserts webbrowser._tryorder is None
- asserts webbrowser._browsers is empty
- calls webbrowser.get()
- asserts webbrowser._tryorder is non-empty
- asserts webbrowser._browsers is non-empty

I wouldn't worry about explicitly testing the thread safety. That's just a normal double-checked locking pattern, so I think code review is sufficient to address that - the only way for it to break is for something to go horribly wrong in threading.RLock().
History
Date User Action Args
2017-02-25 14:52:10ncoghlansetrecipients: + ncoghlan, serhiy.storchaka, louielu
2017-02-25 14:52:10ncoghlansetmessageid: <1488034330.74.0.151318685231.issue29645@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-02-25 14:52:10ncoghlanlinkissue29645 messages
2017-02-25 14:52:10ncoghlancreate