[Stackless] Re: task.run() versus task.remove().run()

[Christian Tismer]

Aaron Watters wrote:
> 
>>
>> So I think the phrase
>>
>> process.remove().run()
>>
>> 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
> task.

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
http://www.tismer.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless