Justin Bronder added the comment: On 16/07/15 23:21 +0000, Vinay Sajip wrote: > > Vinay Sajip added the comment: > > I'm not sure I want to make a special case just to support what seems like a > somewhat pathological use case (no offence intended). > > If you need this, there's no reason you couldn't subclass QueueHandler and > override handle(), is there?
Hey, no offense taken, it wasn't even my code that tripped on this, I just got the pleasure of debugging it! Anyways, it's up to you all if you want to include this, as you mentioned, it's easy enough to work around and I've already done so. However, the reason I submitted the patch is because I believe using the I/O lock is redundant as the Queue is handling the necessary synchronization already. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue24645> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
