On 2017-08-25, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Jon Ribbens <jon+use...@unequivocal.eu> > wrote: >> On 2017-08-25, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 1:47 AM, Jon Ribbens <jon+use...@unequivocal.eu> >>> wrote: >>>> On 2017-08-25, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> That looks like an exception to me. Not a "process is now terminated". >>>>> That's what happened when I pressed Ctrl-C (the IP address was >>>>> deliberately picked as one that doesn't currently exist on my network, >>>>> so it took time). >>>> >>>> Ok yes, so ctrl-C is sending SIGINT which interrupts the system call >>>> and is then caught as a Python exception, so this is very similar to >>>> the SIGALRM idea you already suggested, in that it doesn't work with >>>> threads, except it also relies on there being a person there to press >>>> ctrl-C. So we still don't have any workable solution to the problem. >>> >>> The two complement each other. Want something on a specified clock? >>> SIGALRM. Want to handle that fuzzy notion of "it's been too long"? Let >>> the user hit Ctrl-C. They work basically the same way, from different >>> causes. >> >> Neither works with threads. Threads, neither of them work with. >> With threads, neither of them works. Works, threads with, neither >> of them does. Of them, working with threads, does neither. Threads! >> Them work with! Does not! > > So why are you using multiple threads? You never said that part.
I said it in the majority of the posts I've made in this thread. I said it in the post you were responding to just now. I'm using threads. Now I've said it again. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
