[Stackless] Re: task.run() versus task.remove().run()
tismer at tismer.com
Wed Aug 28 21:31:45 CEST 2002
Aaron Watters wrote:
>> So I think the phrase
>> will do what you wanted.
> This doesn't always return to the tasklet that invoked the call
> (immediately) as desired. I think the problem happens when
> "process" creates more tasklets -- the task list gets changed, I think.
Right, this is no warranty.
> I still would like task.run to always "return" directly to the invoking
How? I mean, when? When the task is really finished? Or when it
yields? (they will learn to yield, soon).
Do you think of a thread like "join"? Then this should be the
name of the function, and it would *block* you until the join
is done. Is that what you need?
> ps: I'd like to also be careful about terminology to avoid confusion.
> process = OS process
> thread = OS thread
> task or taskless = stackless tasklet
> I also unfortunately tend to say "socket" when I mean "channel" :(.
> Will try harder...
socketless-channelthreadly y'rs - chris.proclet
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer at tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34 home +49 30 802 86 56 pager +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/
Stackless mailing list
Stackless at www.tismer.com
More information about the Stackless