Hrvoje Niksic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since the += operator is not compiled into a single bytecode
> instruction, it needs the lock.
Aha, you are right. What I was remembering is that xrange.next
is atomic in CPython, i.e. you can say something like
counter = xrange(10000)
and then
a = counter.next()
doesn't need a lock. I am personally squeamish about relying on things
like this but apparently it is a standard idiom. I will guess, but
I haven't checked and I don't remember hearing, that itertools.count()
also works like that.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
