Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.039 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.93; '*S*': 0.00; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'thread': 0.14; '4:35': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'subject:lock': 0.16; 'subject:when': 0.16; 'sat,': 0.16; 'all.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'possible,': 0.19; 'aug': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; 'right.': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'correct': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'probably': 0.32; 'know.': 0.32; 'option': 0.32; 'quite': 0.32; 'something': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'simple': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'natural': 0.68; 'actually,': 0.84; 'to:none': 0.92; 'suffer': 0.93; 'race': 0.95 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=GdWRdAus+27PCRSTAzh+9QTDLKSmYLXbV7uTb05sm+w=; b=oTj3tpGT9497xUpaaOk0NedCrjkbPcu+REW+Chy5GJpJqe3+6234CRZMRB/R2kwR1l SkkG50goRNC57FPIRcwwMntWfODjsyzPJkptpXfvCPu8xSCFeKCf2ZrGzsVau8M3gsUB fGwArCA3uAhsgdu+fCEdTgUdGyplOBTvqBqJytuNTz0TQVdjou3ZjWxxQgsot2UKCMjU UYP9SMLW2WuRE1vMQFpZFJrCt5uSMeiGfbHWxpP6SJyx9Aebecv1zdjalqG1ZZI12swm GObz+K2fhsw9qUIpMy0t/AXtaKaHbrlJT5fSY4Xt0kNKJ+SnAAd56UK+6qegp2A2bWcu wFOQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.226.69 with SMTP id iv5mr16106457icb.43.1407538646166; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 15:57:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53E4CFD9.4080209@stoneleaf.us> Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 08:57:26 +1000 Subject: Re: Specifying `blocking` and `timeout` when acquiring lock as a context manager From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 12 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1407538648 news.xs4all.nl 2933 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:40638 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:75913 On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 4:35 AM, Neil D. Cerutti wrote: > Doesn't any natural looking use of blocking=False suffer from the same race > condition? What's the correct way to use it? Actually, I don't know. I try to avoid any form of thread locking where possible, and I don't remember the last time I used blocking=False at all. Generally, in those rare occasions when I want to lock, I want to lock reliably, and it's around something so narrow that the simple option will be the best. So you're quite probably right. ChrisA