Message84569
Looking at this, I think this change is fine. The _Event class itself
holds the condition that it's checking for, and the is_set() method
doesn't acquire the lock, so there's no reason to prefer
e.wait()
if e.is_set():
GOT_IT()
over
if e.wait():
GOT_IT()
IOW Tim's reasoning in #1175933 for rejecting a similar change to
_Condition.wait() doesn't apply here. I think we can go ahead without
waiting for Tim to confirm this. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-03-30 15:53:27 | gvanrossum | set | recipients:
+ gvanrossum, tim.peters, georg.brandl, davidfraser, pitrou, tlesher, carmiac |
2009-03-30 15:53:26 | gvanrossum | set | messageid: <1238428406.63.0.520650478421.issue1674032@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2009-03-30 15:53:25 | gvanrossum | link | issue1674032 messages |
2009-03-30 15:53:25 | gvanrossum | create | |
|