Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> added the comment: I'm not actually sure what the use case is for clear(). It's easy enough to just create a new deque. If you can do that, why do you need clear()? Since I don't ever see a reason anybody would want to call clear(), I'm not 100% if it should reset the high-water mark or not. I don't *think* it should, but I'm willing to believe that a use case could exist which would make me change my mind about that.
Popping all the elements off the deque certainly should *not* reset the high water mark. The whole point of tracking the high water mark is to know if the consumer thread ever fell behind the producer thread (yes, I realize queues could be used for non-threading purposes). It's perfectly normal for the queue to drain completely at times, and there's absolutely no reason this should affect the high-water mark. You do raise a good question about whether all of the standard containers should be instrumented. I don't know the answer to that. Queues and, say, dicts are different beasts. It's common to use queues where the putting-in and taking-out are asynchronous, and thus the high-water mark is an indicator of overall application health. I don't see that for dicts, or lists (well, maybe if used as a stack) or most other kinds of containers. _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue4680> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
