[Stackless] Proposed modification WRT threading and scheduling

Richard Tew richard.m.tew at gmail.com
Thu Jan 10 00:20:14 CET 2008

On Jan 10, 2008 11:57 AM, Arnar Birgisson <arnarbi at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 8:14 PM, Jeff Senn <senn at maya.com> wrote:
> > ALWAYS do that.  And I do believe that returning is the "correct"
> > decision because it leaves
> > the higher-level scheduling up to the implementor.  (You could, for
> > instance as Arnar implies,
> > wrap .run() in a loop with time.sleep())
> I agree, keep the behavior consistent and leave it up to the caller of
> run() to reinvoke if desired.

I am tempted to say it isn't worth breaking backwards compatibility
and no-one really noticed it anyway.  But I had no clue why the
scheduler locked up and had to run Stackless under a debugger in order
to realise this was how it really worked.

I would be for also changing this behaviour, but am reticent to do so
without Christian's go ahead.  Any thoughts Christian?


More information about the Stackless mailing list