Christian Walther <cwalt...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
I have the impression we're tracking two completely unrelated problems in this
tracker item.
As to "needs patch" regarding my problem: Here's the solution I proposed in my
original post in patch form - I'm just not sure if it is correct. I don't
recommend applying this until someone who is familiar with the workings of the
threading module has confirmed that removing self from _active is the right
thing to do (and that what I'm doing is the accepted pythonic way of removing a
dictionary entry by value).
Index: Lib/threading.py
===================================================================
--- Lib/threading.py (revision 77598)
+++ Lib/threading.py (working copy)
@@ -611,7 +611,11 @@
try:
with _active_limbo_lock:
- del _active[_get_ident()]
+ for k, v in _active.iteritems():
+ if v is self: break
+ else:
+ assert False, "thread instance not found in _active"
+ del _active[k]
# There must not be any python code between the previous line
# and after the lock is released. Otherwise a tracing function
# could try to acquire the lock again in the same thread, (in
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue1596321>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
