Travis E. Oliphant wrote: > I would want to encourage people not to use the LOCK_FOR_READ unless > there is an important benefit or need to use it.
If you mean that LOCK_FOR_READ would unilaterally deny anyone else read access, my proposal avoids this by not having such a mode at all. So you can always get read access if you really want it. But I expect that most of the time you'll at least want to make sure nobody is writing while you're trying to read. In my terminology you spell that READ | EXCLUDE_WRITE. > Let me think about adding a function for read-write locking that is > separate from getting a view (which implements memory-location > locking). I'm not sure it needs to be a separate function, just a clearly separated set of options in the flags. Remember that clients are only supposed to be holding a buffer for as short a time as possible. It's most likely that the same read/write locking options are going to apply for the whole duration of a buffer operation, I think. -- Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | Carpe post meridiem! | Christchurch, New Zealand | (I'm not a morning person.) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
