On 08/17/2011 08:19 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
That's a nice idea. I have to admit that all these special gil
declarations are a bit messy. I'd also rather introduce clear
decorators, e.g.
@cython.requires_gil # expects gil
cdef a(): ...
@cython.requires.gil(False) # nogil
cdef b(): ...
@cython.aquires_gil # with gil
cdef c(): ...
(Actually, now that we have the "with gil" statement, it could be
worth considering simply noticing the pattern of the entire function
body in a with gil block/as the first statement and acquiring the GIL
before argument parsing.)
Note that we need to declare functions as requiring the GIL to allow
for declaring cpython.pxd if extern functions are implicitly nogil.
I agree, it's messy in the current situation, simplifying would be good.
Assuming we can't acquire the GIL in every single function just to be
sure, I have a hunch that the "acquires_gil" aspect of a function is
just declared in the wrong place. I mean, the same function might be
passed as a callback to C both while holding the GIL and while not
holding the GIL -- it would be nice to automatically wrap it in a
GIL-acquiring wrapper only when needed.
So to me it makes more sense to have acquires_gil be part of function
pointer types, or of the C call where the pointer is passed, or similar.
Sort of like an FFI. Can't think of a practical scheme that's more
user-friendly than the current way though...
Dag Sverre
_______________________________________________
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
