John Krukoff wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 22:54 +0100, mk wrote:
<snip>
No need to use synchro primitives like locks?
I know that it may work, but that strikes me as somehow wrong... I'm
used to using things like Lock().acquire() and Lock().release() when
accessing shared data structures, whatever they are.
<snip>
This is one of those places where the GIL is a good thing, and makes
your life simpler. You could consider it that the interpreter does the
locking for you for such primitive operations, if you like.
I suppose it depends on the complexity of the data structure. A dict's
methods are threadsafe, for example, but if you have a data structure
where access leads to multiple method calls then collectively they need
a lock.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
