Robert Bradshaw wrote: > In other words, you're changing the definition of nogil to be "gets > the GIL if it needs" rather than "doesn't use (or need) the GIL."
But it has never meant that, at least as far as Pyrex is concerned. It's always meant "this function can be called without the gil" and no more. So there's hing wrong with this in principle if you can make it work. -- Greg _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
