[Python-Dev] usefulness of Python version of threading.RLock

[Antoine Pitrou]

On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:02:42 -0700
Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2012/1/5 Charles-François Natali <neologix at free.fr>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Issue #13697 (http://bugs.python.org/issue13697) deals with a problem
> > with the Python version of threading.RLock (a signal handler which
> > tries to acquire the same RLock is called right at the wrong time)
> > which doesn't affect the C version.
> > Whether such a use case can be considered good practise or the best
> > way to fix this is not settled yet, but the question that arose to me
> > is: "why do we have both a C and Python version?".
> > Here's Antoine answer (he suggested to me to bring this up on python-dev":
> > """
> > The C version is quite recent, and there's a school of thought that we
> > should always provide fallback Python implementations.
> > (also, arguably a Python implementation makes things easier to
> > prototype, although I don't think it's the case for an RLock)
> > """
> >
> > So, what do you guys think?
> > Would it be okay to nuke the Python version?
> > Do you have more details on this "school of thought"?
> 
> >From what I understand, the biggest motivation for pure Python
> versions is cooperation with the other Python implementations.  See
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0399/

Apologies, I didn't remember it was written down in PEP.
A bit more than a school of thought, then :-)

Regards

Antoine.