Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 13:52, Benjamin Peterson <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > 2010/3/13 Antoine Pitrou <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > Any thoughts? > \ > The latter solution seems best to me as it would help any 3rd party IO > libraries and require less code modification. > > > Plus the interactiveness approach has been tested by OS thread > schedulers for years and is shown to work. So I vote for the latter > approach as well.
+1 Cheap to calculate and means developer don't need to guess if they should be using the "I am CPU bound" or the "I am IO bound" GIL acquisition macro. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
