[Python-3000] PEP 3108 - stdlib reorg/cleanup

[Adam Olsen]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Alex Martelli <aleaxit at gmail.com> wrote:
>  [SNIP - Alex's well-argued reasons to keep sched]
>
>
>  >  And then, if needed, we can discuss pure simulation (as opposed to
>  >  simulation-testing of systems designed to normally use the "real"
>  >  sched). But already it seems to me there are plenty of use cases to
>  >  justify retaining sched in the library...!
>
>  OK, sched stays. Do you need mutex to stay as-is, get rolled into
>  sched, or can we still ditch that module (at least publicly)?

codesearch shows a few users of mutex, although not nearly as many as
sched itself.  A couple of those seemed to think it was for threading,
which I think is a good reason to at least rename it.

... Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if half the uses mistakenly
believe it's a thread-safe mutex.  It's disturbingly common to see
them loop until .testandset() returns true (which will always be on
the first call, or never.)  That method shouldn't exist.  It's not
worth the effort of redesigning such an obscure module, so I say just
rip it out.

-- 
Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus