Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: Are threads bad? - was: Future of Pypy?
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:53:55 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <8761aqamss.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com>
References: <jbijea5ph9m7sd9gqvp64ci1j708u5vkuq@4ax.com> <DaveFarrance@OMiTTHiSyahooANDTHiS.co.uk> <mailman.19009.1424611670.18130.python-list@python.org> <pqrjeahei7v04lu0nqgsm01jrebj10hj8e@4ax.com> <mailman.19018.1424625741.18130.python-list@python.org> <87fv9xdb22.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <54ea7ff4$0$12983$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <87zj85bcyu.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <mailman.19048.1424661403.18130.python-list@python.org> <87lhjpb89i.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <mailman.19052.1424664024.18130.python-list@python.org> <87h9udb1eq.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <mailman.19058.1424676730.18130.python-list@python.org> <87bnkkb22u.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <mailman.19111.1424738135.18130.python-list@python.org> <87lhjnang1.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> <mailman.19118.1424757423.18130.python-list@python.org> <87bnkjenpp.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0e072597111c5029870b25b8e5ee5406"; logging-data="1699"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18k+fOd3rTkykLXU4XQqeGy"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3f6xNqEiF9o9ZRvEWBX2ZOdkcoQ= sha1:9Et88KGpoJqZD3xA89RhjhOQHZ0=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:86362

Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> writes:
> So why lock categorically like that? Java has a handy "synchronized"
> keyword that wraps the whole method in "with self.lock". ...
> Unfortunately, that deep locking analysis *is* required at every turn,
> and mistakes *are* bound to happen.

I wonder if synchronized was a mistake in Java.  It confused me a lot
when I tried to use it, but I never had to mess with it that much.  I
can't quite tell what your code is doing (why is it attempting a socket
read with a lock held) and I'd be interested to see what an STM version
would look like.