[Stackless] threading.local analogue to tasklets

Arnar Birgisson arnarbi at gmail.com
Thu Jun 21 12:53:38 CEST 2007


On 6/21/07, Richard Tew <richard.m.tew at gmail.com> wrote:
> In my experience with cooperative scheduling you always know when you
> are going to block because you have to be prepared to deal with
> whatever change in circumstances may have occurred when you are
> rescheduled.  In which case the knowing what code is implicitly atomic
> or not does away with any need to use something like set_atomic as a
> matter of course.

I understand. What I'm concerned is that if I'm writing a code that is
part of a framework to be used by other people - I have to prepared
for that they may want to use preemptive scheduling.

Anyways, I guess I will see if using .set_atomic() will hurt or not :o)

thanks for your help,
Arnar

_______________________________________________
Stackless mailing list
Stackless at stackless.com
http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless



More information about the Stackless mailing list