Bugs item #912943, was opened at 2004-03-09 20:16 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by birkenfeld You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=912943&group_id=5470
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Documentation Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Roy Smith (roysmith) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: 7.5.6 Thread Objects is too vague Initial Comment: Some items which could be improved.... "Once the thread's activity is started, the thread is considered 'alive' and 'active' (these concepts are almost, but not quite exactly, the same; their definition is intentionally somewhat vague)." This is a bit silly. Either these attributes are intended to be exposed to users or they're not. If they are, they should be well defined. If not, they shouldn't be mentioned at all. "If the subclass overrides the constructor, it must make sure to invoke the base class constructor (Thread.__init__()) before doing anything else to the thread." This is misleading. You need to call "Thread.__init__ (self)", i.e. pass along the self argument. At least I think you do :-) "join([timeout]) ... When the timeout argument is present and not None, it should be a floating point number specifying a timeout for the operation in seconds (or fractions thereof)." What happens if you pass None? Does it wait forever? Is this any different from not passing any argument at all? What happens if a timeout occurs? Is there any way to differentiate between a timeout and a normal return? "A thread can be join()ed many times." Presumably only if all but the last call timed out? Or maybe not? If you get a normal return (i.e. not a timeout) from join(), and then call join() again, what happens? Does it just return immediately with no error? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Reinhold Birkenfeld (birkenfeld) Date: 2005-07-17 23:01 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1188172 The second item is no bug. Methods in the docs are always written with a trailing "()". I have addressed the join() issues in Doc/lib/libthreading.tex r1.22, r1.20.4.2. Closing as the remaining issue is covered by the patch mentioned by alanvgreen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Alan Green (alanvgreen) Date: 2005-01-23 06:46 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1174944 Submitted Patch 1107656 which addresses the 'alive' and 'active' issue. It does this by deprecating the isAlive() method and adding an isActive method instead. The patch also updates the documentation to talk about threads being 'active' rather than 'alive and active'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=912943&group_id=5470 _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
