[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Changes by Berker Peksag : -- status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://ma

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

R. David Murray added the comment: Thanks, Akira, but I did not use your patch, since it still had the paragraph reflow in it. -- resolution: -> fixed stage: commit review -> resolved ___ Python tracker _

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

R. David Murray added the comment: Oops, typoed the issue number. New changeset 3a9b1e5fe179 by R David Murray in branch '3.4': #23215: reflow paragraph. https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3a9b1e5fe179 New changeset 52a06812d5da by R David Murray in branch 'default': Merge: #23215: note that tim

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 55ad65c4f9e2 by R David Murray in branch '3.4': #23251: Note that time.sleep affects the calling thread only. https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/55ad65c4f9e2 New changeset 5e01c68cabbf by R David Murray in branch '2.7': #23251: note that time.sleep a

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Akira Li added the comment: I've removed mentioning of GIL and uploaded a new patch. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37850/docs-time.sleep-other-threads-are-not-blocked-2.diff ___ Python tracker

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Georg Brandl added the comment: Agreed. "of the current thread" is a good addition. The sleep() docs are already longer than I would like. -- nosy: +georg.brandl ___ Python tracker ___

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I'm with Antoine. Yes, GIL is extremely important but please don't put GIL mentions everywhere. On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > > Please let's stop it. Mentioning the GIL in every place in the docu

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Please let's stop it. Mentioning the GIL in every place in the documentation will only make people more worried and confused about something they shouldn't be confused or worried about. If you think some docs should discuss the GIL and its effect on running th

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Akira Li added the comment: > Only if the behaviour was unintuitive (i.e. if it *didn't* release the > GIL) would it make sense to document it. There is no intuitive interface, not even the nipple. It's all learned. [1] > Yes, on consideration I agree with Antoine. That last sentence should >

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

R. David Murray added the comment: Yes, on consideration I agree with Antoine. That last sentence should be deleted. Otherwise we'd need to mention that the gil was released every place that the gil was released, which would be very redundant. The general rule is that anything that blocks i

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > If GIL is not released then all Python code in other threads is > effectively blocked. But that would be a stupid implementation of sleep(). It is not desirable to clutter the docs with such mentions: most calls to the OS in the stdlib release the GIL. Onl

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Akira Li added the comment: > I think it's superfluous to mention the GIL here, since it has no impact on > the function. If GIL is not released then all Python code in other threads is effectively blocked. It is worth mentioning explicitly that it is guaranteed to be released during the sleep

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I think it's superfluous to mention the GIL here, since it has no impact on the function. -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

R. David Murray added the comment: I actually didn't know that reitveld was smart enough to highlight just the text changes in a reflowed paragraph. Nevertheless, for ease of looking at diff in the repository using the hg command (which is not that smart), I prefer to commit doc changes withou

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Martin Panter added the comment: What I have sometimes done in this situation is just break the overly long line into two short lines -- ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Andrew Svetlov added the comment: I guess R. David Murray asked you to make the least minimal change, even it breaks the formatting rules. Paragraph reflow is safe when it's done by the Core Developer but it requires additional check (and probably mercurial conflict errors on merging the change

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Akira Li added the comment: I do not understand. Have you tried to look at the patch in Rietveld? The new content is highlighted in a darker green. It is clearly visible. I've tested on Chromium, Firefox, Safari. If I won't reflow then the first line will be longer than the recommended 80 in de

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

Martin Panter added the comment: There is also a new sentence about the GIL at the end, but leaving the inbetween lines as they were would verify this -- nosy: +vadmium ___ Python tracker _

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

R. David Murray added the comment: Can you re-upload the patch without reflowing the paragraph? I think the only thing needed is the addition of the word thread, to mirror the equivalent unix man page phrasing, and I think that's what you've done, but I can't easily tell from the provided pat

[issue23251] mention in time.sleep() docs that it does not block other Python threads

New submission from Akira Li: There is the corresponding StackOverflow question with 60K view "time.sleep — sleeps thread or process?" [1] The documentation patch is attached. [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/92928/time-sleep-sleeps-thread-or-process -- assignee: docs@python com