Python threading (was: Re: global interpreter lock not working as it should)

anton wilson anton.wilson at
Tue Aug 6 20:31:24 CEST 2002

On Tuesday 06 August 2002 04:45 am, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> anton wilson <anton.wilson at> writes:
> > Well, when I said coincidence, I didn't necessarily mean huge, it
> > works, but when compared to the number of times it tries to give up
> > the interpreter . .  .
> ... then you'll find that it works precisely as designed.
> > The timer tick does happen 100x per second and since python gives up
> > the lock every 10 us or so, it's really not a huge coincidence for
> > an overlap. I just don't really like the reliance on this
> > coincidence.
> Accept it. It is meant to work this way.

I understand that, but still . . . you have to agree that the ratio here is 
pretty horrible for certain systems even if it was supposed to be 
cross-platform. It works as it should, but for this particular OS, it could 
be helped along. There's nothing wrong with being more efficient if you can 
be and it won't hurt any design goals.

> Regards,
> Martin

More information about the Python-list mailing list