> this is a good idea, my experience with gump is also that the updates > are taking ages.
Yeah, once I started down this path it became glaringly obvious this was a good win. Most of the updates take time to figure out that little or nothing needs updating, and those are great things to have spawned off. :) The code doesn't appear to be breaking (despite Python not locking in base classes like lists, and the Gump code not locking all that it might). I tried doing a Google search for locking in Python, and really found little "street wise" information. I found some updates from a Mr Stein (a gent, not a gazillion miles from ASF ;-) but little that really told me what the risks are w/ running large pieces of Python in separate threads. I guess we suck it and see. Over time I can make the locking totally tight, right now a few lists are appended to [work done], a few variables are set [setting states of modules], and these could occur simultaneously but (1) I don't know if that will really hurt (2) the threads (CVS|SVN updates) are so large, the chances of them hitting at the same time are pretty small. All Pythonic insights welcomed... regards, Adam --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
