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 vstinner
Recipients Johan Dahlin, Mark.Shannon, emilyemorehouse, eric.snow, koobs, maciej.szulik, nascheme, ncoghlan, pconnell, phsilva, pmpp, serhiy.storchaka, shprotx, steve.dower, vstinner, yselivanov
Date 2020-04-08.21:58:41
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1586383121.75.0.951313702985.issue33608@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
This issue has a long history. A change has been applied and then reverted three times in a row. Pending calls are now per-interpreter.

The issue title is "Add a cross-interpreter-safe mechanism to indicate that an object may be destroyed." but I don't understand if pending calls are expected to be used to communicate between two interpreters. Why not using a UNIX pipe and exchange bytes through it? Py_AddPendingCall() is a weird concept. I would prefer to not abuse it.

Moreover, it's unclear if this issue attempts to *share* a same object between two interpreters. I would prefer to avoid that by any possible way.

I close this issue with a complex history.

If someone wants to continue to work on this topic, please open an issue with a very clear description of what should be done and how it is supposed to be used.
History
Date User Action Args
2020-04-08 21:58:41vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, nascheme, ncoghlan, phsilva, pmpp, Mark.Shannon, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka, maciej.szulik, yselivanov, koobs, steve.dower, pconnell, emilyemorehouse, Johan Dahlin, shprotx
2020-04-08 21:58:41vstinnersetmessageid: <1586383121.75.0.951313702985.issue33608@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2020-04-08 21:58:41vstinnerlinkissue33608 messages
2020-04-08 21:58:41vstinnercreate