Kristján Valur Jónsson <krist...@ccpgames.com> added the comment: Antoine: I agree, the semaphore is the quick and robust solution.
sbt: I see your point. Still, I think we still may have a flaw: The statement that (owned-timeouts) is never an under-estimate isn't true on modern architectures, I think. The order of the atomic decrement operations in the code means nothing and cannot be depended on to guarantee such a claim: The thread doing the reading may see the individual updates in any order, and so the estimate may be an over- or an underestimate. It would fix this and simplify things a lot to take the special case for timeout==0 out of the code. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11618> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
