[Python-Dev] Last chance!

[Nick Bastin]

On Mar 28, 2004, at 5:05 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:

>>> I saved the message, but haven't had the time yet to think things
>>> through.
>>>
>>> I *did* notice at least one case where using f_tstate might actually
>>> be a mistake: theoretically it's possible that two or more threads
>>> alternate calling next() on a generator (if they wrap it in a 
>>> critical
>>> section); AFAICT the f_tstate is never updated.
>
> [Christian]
>> I've been running Stackless Python without f_tstate for more than
>> three months now, in various applications.
>> May I check in a patch to evict f_tstate?
>
> Sure!  Let stackless lead the way. :-)

This may screw up the work I'm doing to get the profiler to work 
transparently with threads.  Since I can't promise that the profiler 
will be in the same thread as the code being profiled, I can't 
guarantee that PyThreadState_GET() will give the correct thread state, 
so I grab the thread state from the frame object.  Of course, this work 
is also in the super-early stages of development, so I may go some 
other direction in the future when I find out that this doesn't work 
correctly...just pointing out a potential user (victim).

--
Nick