Antoine Pitrou <pit...@free.fr> added the comment:
Davin: > This is my fault because I altered SharedMemoryManager to no longer support > functionality from SyncManager that I thought could be confusing to include. > I am just now discovering this and am not immediately sure if simply removing > the SharedMemoryManager-relevant lines from your patch is the right solution > but I wanted to mention this thought right away. If SharedMemoryManager subclasses SyncManager then I *think* it should obey the SyncManager contract. Regardless of the shared memory facility, the user may also want to "shared" regular proxies between processes. (to be honest, I don't think the multiprocessing Manager facility is used a lot currently...) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue35813> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
