Message98031
| Author |
cwalther |
| Recipients |
Rhamphoryncus, amaury.forgeotdarc, brett.cannon, brian.curtin, cwalther, gregory.p.smith |
| Date |
2010年01月18日.20:40:00 |
| SpamBayes Score |
5.1940174e-11 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1263847209.29.0.854125082814.issue1596321@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I have the impression we're tracking two completely unrelated problems in this tracker item.
As to "needs patch" regarding my problem: Here's the solution I proposed in my original post in patch form - I'm just not sure if it is correct. I don't recommend applying this until someone who is familiar with the workings of the threading module has confirmed that removing self from _active is the right thing to do (and that what I'm doing is the accepted pythonic way of removing a dictionary entry by value).
Index: Lib/threading.py
===================================================================
--- Lib/threading.py (revision 77598)
+++ Lib/threading.py (working copy)
@@ -611,7 +611,11 @@
try:
with _active_limbo_lock:
- del _active[_get_ident()]
+ for k, v in _active.iteritems():
+ if v is self: break
+ else:
+ assert False, "thread instance not found in _active"
+ del _active[k]
# There must not be any python code between the previous line
# and after the lock is released. Otherwise a tracing function
# could try to acquire the lock again in the same thread, (in |
|