Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Victor Stinner
Hi,

Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
> 
> >Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations 
> > about the
> > thread implementation.
> 
> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why 
> does it have a leading underscore?

Well, I suppose that this function might be specific to CPython. Do you
think that this function can/should be implemented in PyPy, Jython and
IronPython?

Victor

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Drop OS/2 and VMS support?

2011-04-20 Thread Lennart Regebro
Various people wrote:
> So please go ahead and add them to PEP 11.

> If you want to post the "call for support" to Python Insider, let me know off 
> list and I will set you up with access.

> Doesn't it have more chances of succeeding if posted to comp.lang.python, 
> simply?

I say "all of the above". It could be good to find a OS/2 and OpenVMS
developer mailing list as well, and post it there.

--
Lennart Regebro, Colliberty: http://www.colliberty.com/
Telephone: +48 691 268 328
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


[Python-Dev] Buildbots and faulthandler

2011-04-20 Thread Victor Stinner
Hi,

The new faulthandler module is now fully functional and it has no more
known issue. Its timeout feature is used on regrtest to dump the Python
backtrace and exit if a test takes more than 1 hour.

Using the regrtest timeout and faulthandler signal handlers (enable in
regrtest), I started to collect tracebacks of all timeouts.

Open issues:

 * test_threading.test_notify() on Windows
   http://bugs.python.org/issue11769
   Not analyzed yet. I am unable to reproduce it in my VM.

 * test_mmap.test_large_offset() on Mac OS X
   http://bugs.python.org/issue11779
   May be related (and fixed) by issue #11277 which has a patch.

 * test_threading.test_3_join_in_forked_from_thread() on Ubuntu
   http://bugs.python.org/issue11870
   Only seen once.

 * test_mmap.test_big_buffer() on Mac OS X (it's a crash, bus error)
   http://bugs.python.org/issue11277
   The origin of the problem was already identified, but the trace
   proves that faulthandler is able to catch correctly SIGBUS ;-)

 * test_ttk_guionly on Mac OS X (bus error)
   http://bugs.python.org/issue5120
   Same as #11277 (the origin of the problem was already identified)

Closed issues:

 * test_io.test_interrupted_write_text() on FreeBSD
   http://bugs.python.org/issue11859
   (there was already enough information without faulthandler)

 * test_threadsignals.test_signals() on Mac OS X
   http://bugs.python.org/issue11768
   Race condition (deadlock).

 * test_multiprocessing.test_async_error_callback() on many OSes
   http://bugs.python.org/issue8428
   Race condition.

I'm proud of #11768 (because I fixed it). The bug was a deadlock. It is
usually very hard to reproduce such issue (a deadlock) and without
faulthandler, the only available information was the name of the file.
With faulthandler, we have not only the name of the test function, but
also the full traceback of the hang, but also the traceback of all other
threads.

Thanks to the faulthandler trace of #8428, with the traceback of all
threads, Charles-Francois Natali was able to understand and fix another
complex race condition in multiprocessing (at shutdown).

I also fixed other issues (not using faulthandler) and so ALL OUR 3.X
BUILDBOTS ARE GREEN!

... ok ok, except:

 - sparc Debian 3.x: offline since 21 days
 - PPC Leopard 3.x : "hg clean" fails with
twisted.internet.error.ProcessExitedAlready, but I think that except
this buildbot specific issue, it must be green
 - x86 Windows7 3.x: the master lost the connection with the slave on
test_cmd_line, but it should be a sporadic problem

Anyway, if you see a "Timeout (1:00:00)!" or "Fatal error" (with a
traceback) issue on a buildbot, please open a new issue (if it doesn't
exist, search a least the name of the test file). If you have other
problems related to regrtest timeout or faulthandler, contact me or open
an issue.

Finally, I'm very happy to see that my faulthandler module was as useful
as I expected: with more informations, we are now able to identify race
conditions. I hope that we will fix all remaining threading, signal and
subprocess race conditions!

Victor

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Victor Stinner
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
>> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
>>
>> >    Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations 
>> > about the
>> > thread implementation.
>>
>> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
>> does it have a leading underscore?
>
> Well, I suppose that this function might be specific to CPython. Do you
> think that this function can/should be implemented in PyPy, Jython and
> IronPython?

I agree with your reasoning (and the leading underscore), but I
suggest marking the docs with the implementation detail flag.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [email protected]   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Buildbots and faulthandler

2011-04-20 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Victor Stinner
 wrote:
> Finally, I'm very happy to see that my faulthandler module was as useful
> as I expected: with more informations, we are now able to identify race
> conditions. I hope that we will fix all remaining threading, signal and
> subprocess race conditions!

Excellent work :)

Minor nit: the faulthandler docs could use an "impl-detail" block
similar to the one in the dis module docs.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [email protected]   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Buildbots and faulthandler

2011-04-20 Thread Ethan Furman

Victor Stinner wrote:

Finally, I'm very happy to see that my faulthandler module was as useful
as I expected [...]


Congratulations!  Nice work.

~Ethan~
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread exarkun

On 08:20 am, [email protected] wrote:

Hi,

Le mardi 19 avril 2011 � 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a �crit :

On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:

>Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing 
informations about the

> thread implementation.

Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
does it have a leading underscore?




Can I propose something wildly radical?  Maybe the guarantees made about 
whether an API will be available in future versions of Python 
(ostensibly what "public" vs "private" is for) should not be tightly 
coupled to the decision about whether to bother to explain what an API 
does?


Jean-Paul
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2011/4/20  :
> On 08:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
>>>
>>> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
>>>
>>> >    Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations
>>> > about the
>>> > thread implementation.
>>>
>>> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
>>> does it have a leading underscore?
>>
>
> Can I propose something wildly radical?  Maybe the guarantees made about
> whether an API will be available in future versions of Python (ostensibly
> what "public" vs "private" is for) should not be tightly coupled to the
> decision about whether to bother to explain what an API does?

With what criteria would you propose to replace it with?



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Victor Stinner
Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 20:24 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Victor Stinner
>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
> >> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
> >>
> >> >Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations 
> >> > about the
> >> > thread implementation.
> >>
> >> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
> >> does it have a leading underscore?
> >
> > Well, I suppose that this function might be specific to CPython. Do you
> > think that this function can/should be implemented in PyPy, Jython and
> > IronPython?
> 
> I agree with your reasoning (and the leading underscore), but I
> suggest marking the docs with the implementation detail flag.

I chose to return a dict to be flexible: any thread implementation may
add new specific keys. There is just one mandatory key: 'name', name of
the thread implementation (nt, os2, pthread or solaris for CPython 3.3).

http://docs.python.org/dev/py3k/library/threading.html#threading._info

After thinking twice, PyPy, Jython and IronPython should be able to fill
the only required key (name).

PyPy reuses the code from CPython, so it can just reuse the same names
(pthread or nt). I suppose that IronPython uses Windows threads and
semaphores, so it can use the name 'nt'. For Jython, I don't know if
Jython is able to get the name of the thread implementation used by the
JVM. If it is not, something like 'jvm' can be used.

threading._info() is a function: it can call other functions to retrieve
informations (it is not hardcoded or initialized at startup).

What do you think? Can I remove the leading underscore? :-)

Victor

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread exarkun

On 01:11 pm, [email protected] wrote:

2011/4/20  :

On 08:20 am, [email protected] wrote:


Hi,

Le mardi 19 avril 2011 � 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a �crit :


On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:

>    Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing 
informations

> about the
> thread implementation.

Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, 
why

does it have a leading underscore?




Can I propose something wildly radical?  Maybe the guarantees made 
about
whether an API will be available in future versions of Python 
(ostensibly
what "public" vs "private" is for) should not be tightly coupled to 
the

decision about whether to bother to explain what an API does?


With what criteria would you propose to replace it with?


I'm not sure what kind of criteria you're thinking of.  I'm only 
suggesting that:


 1) Document whatever you want (preferably as much as possible)

 2) Make "privateness" defined by whether there is a leading underscore

It is a big mistake to think that documentation isn't necessary for 
things just because you don't want application developers to use them. 
Maintainers benefit from it just as much.


Jean-Paul
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread R. David Murray
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:11:48 -0500, Benjamin Peterson  
wrote:
> 2011/4/20  :
> > On 08:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >    Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations
> >>> > about the
> >>> > thread implementation.
> >>>
> >>> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
> >>> does it have a leading underscore?
> >>
> >
> > Can I propose something wildly radical?  Maybe the guarantees made about
> > whether an API will be available in future versions of Python (ostensibly
> > what "public" vs "private" is for) should not be tightly coupled to the
> > decision about whether to bother to explain what an API does?
> 
> With what criteria would you propose to replace it with?

I believe Jean-Paul was suggesting that just because an interface is
marked as "private" and might go away or change in the future does not
automatically mean it must also be undocumented.  To which I say +1.
(Note that we already have a whole module like that: test.support.)

--
R. David Murray   http://www.bitdance.com
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2011/4/20 R. David Murray :
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:11:48 -0500, Benjamin Peterson  
> wrote:
>> 2011/4/20  :
>> > On 08:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
>> >>>
>> >>> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> >    Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations
>> >>> > about the
>> >>> > thread implementation.
>> >>>
>> >>> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
>> >>> does it have a leading underscore?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Can I propose something wildly radical?  Maybe the guarantees made about
>> > whether an API will be available in future versions of Python (ostensibly
>> > what "public" vs "private" is for) should not be tightly coupled to the
>> > decision about whether to bother to explain what an API does?
>>
>> With what criteria would you propose to replace it with?
>
> I believe Jean-Paul was suggesting that just because an interface is
> marked as "private" and might go away or change in the future does not
> automatically mean it must also be undocumented.  To which I say +1.
> (Note that we already have a whole module like that: test.support.)

I think that test.* as a special case is private stuff.


-- 
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2011/4/20 Victor Stinner :
> Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 20:24 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Victor Stinner
>>  wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
>> >> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >    Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations 
>> >> > about the
>> >> > thread implementation.
>> >>
>> >> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
>> >> does it have a leading underscore?
>> >
>> > Well, I suppose that this function might be specific to CPython. Do you
>> > think that this function can/should be implemented in PyPy, Jython and
>> > IronPython?
>>
>> I agree with your reasoning (and the leading underscore), but I
>> suggest marking the docs with the implementation detail flag.
>
> I chose to return a dict to be flexible: any thread implementation may
> add new specific keys. There is just one mandatory key: 'name', name of
> the thread implementation (nt, os2, pthread or solaris for CPython 3.3).

How about using a structseq ala sys.float_info or sys.long_info? (In
fact, we might want to put this in sys.)


-- 
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: os.sendfile(): on Linux if offset parameter is passed as NULL we were

2011-04-20 Thread Giampaolo Rodolà
No we haven't.
I plan to make a unique commit for offset=None on Linux and a serie of
other tests I have implemented for py-sendfile module [1].
In details test for small file, empty file and (most important) large file:
http://code.google.com/p/py-sendfile/source/browse/trunk/test/test_sendfile.py?spec=svn68&r=68#296

[1] http://code.google.com/p/py-sendfile

--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib
http://code.google.com/p/psutil



2011/4/19 Antoine Pitrou :
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:47:21 +0200
> giampaolo.rodola  wrote:
>
>> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/8c49f7fbba1d
>> changeset:   69437:8c49f7fbba1d
>> user:        Giampaolo Rodola' 
>> date:        Tue Apr 19 09:47:16 2011 +0200
>> summary:
>>   os.sendfile(): on Linux if offset parameter is passed as NULL we were 
>> erroneously returning a (bytes_sent, None) tuple instead of bytes_sent
>
> Do we have tests for this?
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: 
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/g.rodola%40gmail.com
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: os.sendfile(): on Linux if offset parameter is passed as NULL we were

2011-04-20 Thread Terry Reedy

On 4/20/2011 2:09 PM, Giampaolo Rodolà wrote:

No we haven't.


"No we haven't" what? Such out-of-context responses exemplify why 
top-posting is greatly inferior for readers, who vastly outnumber the 
one writer. If that line had been put where it belongs, right after what 
it refers to, it would have been clear.


--
Terry Jan Reedy


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Terry Reedy

On 4/20/2011 12:57 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:


On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:


Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about 
the
thread implementation.



How about using a structseq ala sys.float_info or sys.long_info? (In
fact, we might want to put this in sys.)


sys.thread_info strikes me as a good idea too. The only thing required 
should be 'name' with '' at the default indicating no threading.


--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Terry Reedy

On 4/20/2011 10:11 AM, [email protected] wrote:

On 01:11 pm, [email protected] wrote:



It is a big mistake to think that documentation isn't necessary for
things just because you don't want application developers to use them.
Maintainers benefit from it just as much.


Maintainers can and will read the doc string.



--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Victor Stinner
Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 11:57 -0500, Benjamin Peterson a écrit :
> 2011/4/20 Victor Stinner :
> > Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 20:24 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Victor Stinner
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 22:42 -0400, Terry Reedy a écrit :
> >> >> On 4/19/2011 5:59 PM, victor.stinner wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing 
> >> >> > informations about the
> >> >> > thread implementation.
> >> >>
> >> >> Since this is being documented, making it part of the public api, why
> >> >> does it have a leading underscore?
> >> >
> >> > Well, I suppose that this function might be specific to CPython. Do you
> >> > think that this function can/should be implemented in PyPy, Jython and
> >> > IronPython?
> >>
> >> I agree with your reasoning (and the leading underscore), but I
> >> suggest marking the docs with the implementation detail flag.
> >
> > I chose to return a dict to be flexible: any thread implementation may
> > add new specific keys. There is just one mandatory key: 'name', name of
> > the thread implementation (nt, os2, pthread or solaris for CPython 3.3).
> 
> How about using a structseq ala sys.float_info or sys.long_info? (In
> fact, we might want to put this in sys.)

Would you prefer something like the following example?

>>> sys.thread_info
sys.threadinfo(name='pthread', 'lock_implementation': 'semaphore',
version: 'NPTL 2.11.2')
>>> sys.thread_info
sys.threadinfo(name='nt', 'lock_implementation': 'semaphore', version:
'')
>>> sys.thread_info
sys.threadinfo(name='os2', 'lock_implementation': '', version: '')

Victor

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Buildbots and faulthandler

2011-04-20 Thread Terry Reedy

On 4/20/2011 7:57 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:

Victor Stinner wrote:

Finally, I'm very happy to see that my faulthandler module was as useful
as I expected [...]


Congratulations! Nice work.


Ditto. Multiple pats on the back.

--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2011/4/20 Victor Stinner :
> Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 11:57 -0500, Benjamin Peterson a écrit :
>> How about using a structseq ala sys.float_info or sys.long_info? (In
>> fact, we might want to put this in sys.)
>
> Would you prefer something like the following example?
>
 sys.thread_info
> sys.threadinfo(name='pthread', 'lock_implementation': 'semaphore',
> version: 'NPTL 2.11.2')
 sys.thread_info
> sys.threadinfo(name='nt', 'lock_implementation': 'semaphore', version:
> '')
 sys.thread_info
> sys.threadinfo(name='os2', 'lock_implementation': '', version: '')

The only things that would improve that beautiful sight would be
s/threadinfo/thread_info/. :)



-- 
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #11223: Add threading._info() function providing informations about the

2011-04-20 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:03:19 -0500
Benjamin Peterson  wrote:

> 2011/4/20 Victor Stinner :
> > Le mercredi 20 avril 2011 à 11:57 -0500, Benjamin Peterson a écrit :
> >> How about using a structseq ala sys.float_info or sys.long_info? (In
> >> fact, we might want to put this in sys.)
> >
> > Would you prefer something like the following example?
> >
>  sys.thread_info
> > sys.threadinfo(name='pthread', 'lock_implementation': 'semaphore',
> > version: 'NPTL 2.11.2')
>  sys.thread_info
> > sys.threadinfo(name='nt', 'lock_implementation': 'semaphore', version:
> > '')
>  sys.thread_info
> > sys.threadinfo(name='os2', 'lock_implementation': '', version: '')
> 
> The only things that would improve that beautiful sight would be
> s/threadinfo/thread_info/. :)

And None instead of the empty string when a value is unknown/irrelevant.

Regards

Antoine.


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com