STINNER Victor added the comment: Lars Gustäbel added the comment: > I agree with David that there is no need for tarfile to be thread-safe. There > is nothing to be gained from distributing one TarFile object among multiple > threads because it operates on a single resource which has to be accessed > sequentially anyway. So, it seems best to me if we leave it like it is and > let the user add locks around it as she/he sees fit.
In asyncio, it was a design choice to not be thread-safe, to allow more optimizations and support multiple implementations of asyncio, without this important constraint. I modified recently the asyncio doc to warn users in each class that asyncio objects are *not* thread safe, with an explanation how to use correctly asyncio with threads. https://docs.python.org/dev/library/asyncio-eventloop.html#asyncio.BaseEventLoop "This class is not thread safe." Such change in tarfile doc is probably enough for tarfile. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23649> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
