Steve Holden wrote: > Carl J. Van Arsdall wrote: > [... rant ...] > >> So with this whole "hey mr. nice thread, please die for me" concept gets >> ugly quickly in complex situations and doesn't scale well at all. >> Furthermore, say you have a complex systems where users can write >> pluggable modules. IF a module gets stuck inside of some screwed up >> loop and is unable to poll for messages there's no way to kill the >> module without killing the whole system. Any of you guys thought of a >> way around this scenario? >> >> >> > > Communications through Queue.Queue objects can help. But if you research > the history of this design decision in the language you should discover > there are fairly sound rasons for not allowing arbitrary "threadicide". > > > Right, I'm wondering if there was a way to make an interrupt driven communication mechanism for threads? Example: thread receives a message, stops everything, and processes the message.
-- Carl J. Van Arsdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Build and Release MontaVista Software -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
