[Twisted-Python] Re: [Twisted-commits] r14922 - Fix to replace a lambda with something that's safe in the scope when it's
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 03:45:59 -0600, Matt Goodall <mg@wolfwood.twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
Note that this changes the behavior from constructing Failure instances in the reactor thread to creating them in a worker thread. Jp
Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
Yes, very true. Thanks for raising it. Does it matter in this case? All the the args passed to Failure are worked out in the thread and I think that means Failure's __init__ does basically nothing. Did I miss something? Thanks, Matt -- __ / \__ Matt Goodall, Pollenation Internet Ltd \__/ \ w: http://www.pollenation.net __/ \__/ e: matt@pollenation.net / \__/ \ t: +44 (0)113 2252500 \__/ \__/ / \ Any views expressed are my own and do not necessarily \__/ reflect the views of my employer.
Matt Goodall wrote:
Also, I think it's now pointless digging the exception information out of Python to pass to the Failure.__init__. That's what Failure will *now* do on its own when passed nothing. - Matt -- __ / \__ Matt Goodall, Pollenation Internet Ltd \__/ \ w: http://www.pollenation.net __/ \__/ e: matt@pollenation.net / \__/ \ t: +44 (0)113 2252500 \__/ \__/ / \ Any views expressed are my own and do not necessarily \__/ reflect the views of my employer.
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:27:36 +0100, Matt Goodall <matt@pollenation.net> wrote:
It may work fine now. The API isn't guaranteed to be threadsafe, though.
As it stands in SVN now, I agree. The Failure was constructed that way before since it was being instantiated in a different thread than the one in which the exception occurred. Jp
Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
Yes, very true. Thanks for raising it. Does it matter in this case? All the the args passed to Failure are worked out in the thread and I think that means Failure's __init__ does basically nothing. Did I miss something? Thanks, Matt -- __ / \__ Matt Goodall, Pollenation Internet Ltd \__/ \ w: http://www.pollenation.net __/ \__/ e: matt@pollenation.net / \__/ \ t: +44 (0)113 2252500 \__/ \__/ / \ Any views expressed are my own and do not necessarily \__/ reflect the views of my employer.
Matt Goodall wrote:
Also, I think it's now pointless digging the exception information out of Python to pass to the Failure.__init__. That's what Failure will *now* do on its own when passed nothing. - Matt -- __ / \__ Matt Goodall, Pollenation Internet Ltd \__/ \ w: http://www.pollenation.net __/ \__/ e: matt@pollenation.net / \__/ \ t: +44 (0)113 2252500 \__/ \__/ / \ Any views expressed are my own and do not necessarily \__/ reflect the views of my employer.
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:27:36 +0100, Matt Goodall <matt@pollenation.net> wrote:
It may work fine now. The API isn't guaranteed to be threadsafe, though.
As it stands in SVN now, I agree. The Failure was constructed that way before since it was being instantiated in a different thread than the one in which the exception occurred. Jp
participants (2)
-
Jean-Paul Calderone -
Matt Goodall