Russell Warren wrote: > Thanks for the detailed repsone... sorry for the lag in responding to > it. [discussion of problems with timeouts on threaded code's sockets] > > Not quite what I was after I don't think since potentially interfering > code needs to check the lock (via acquire) to avoid conflict. What I > guess I mean is something general for the process saying "never ever > interrupt this block og code by running code on another thread, > regardless of whether the other thread(s) check a lock". Thinking more > about it it seems unreasonable so I'll drop the question. >
Well, I'm about out of ideas, but c.l.py is a very inventive group, so maybe someone else will be able to contribute a bright thought. Anyone? regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com PyCon TX 2006 www.python.org/pycon/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
