[issue1873] threading.Thread.join() description could be more explicit

[Georg Brandl]

Georg Brandl added the comment:

Committed r60083.

--
resolution:  -> fixed
status: open -> closed

__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list 
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1873] threading.Thread.join() description could be more explicit

[Christian Heimes]

Changes by Christian Heimes:


--
assignee:  -> georg.brandl
keywords: +easy
nosy: +georg.brandl
priority:  -> low
versions: +Python 2.6 -Python 2.5

__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list 
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1873] threading.Thread.join() description could be more explicit

[Roy Smith]

New submission from Roy Smith:

At http://docs.python.org/lib/thread-objects.html, under join(), it says:

"As join() always returns None, you must call isAlive() to decide whether a 
timeout 
happened."

This would be better if it were more explicit, i.e.

"As join() always returns None, you must call isAlive() after calling join() to 
decide whether a timeout happened; a return value of True indicates the join() 
call 
timed out."

--
components: Documentation
messages: 60190
nosy: roysmith
severity: minor
status: open
title: threading.Thread.join() description could be more explicit
type: rfe
versions: Python 2.5

__
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list 
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com