Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Kirk McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I want to somehow, in some way, provide an iteration interface to this
> >function. Thoughts?
>
> Run it in a separate thread/process?
Sounds best to me. Specifically, given (e.g.) something like the OP's
def func(callback):
for i in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]:
callback(i)
we might have a wrapper such as:
import thread
import Queue
def wrap_cb_into_gen(func):
q = Queue.Queue(1) # maximum size of 1
def callback(item):
q.put(item)
all_done_sentinel = object()
def thread_skeleton():
func(callback)
q.put(all_done_sentinel)
thread.start_new_thread(thread_skeleton, ())
while True:
item = q.get()
if item is all_done_sentinel: break
yield item
Of course, there are lighter-weight options than a length-1 Queue for
the purpose of synchronizing these two threads, but I always tend to
prefer Queue (for its simplicity, generality, solidity) to other
synchronization structures and architectures, unless there is some very
strong reason to do otherwise in a specific case. Also, I normally use
module threading rather than the lower-level module thread -- here,
clearly, either one will do just fine.
Alex
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
