Re: Re: New stackless proposal

Paul Prescod wrote:
> Mark Hahn wrote:
>
>> ...
>>> I notice you use a wrapping model here rather than an inheritance
>>> model (opposite of properties). OSThread looks like a wrapper.
>>
>>
>> It is an inheritance model.
>
> I see nothing in the example to indicate that OSThread inherits from
> thread1 or vice versa.

The statement "thread1 = OSThread(thread1)" is an instantiation.  OSThread
is a prototype.  thread1 is a func.  OSThread extends Func and thread1 wraps
thread1.  So I guess it both extends and wraps.  I thought this was a common
"decorator" technique.  I got it from Serge.

>> ... It just happens to reuse the thread1 binding.
>
> Can you see how that makes it more difficult to read the code?

This is just sample code.  Would this code make you feel better:

def func(time):
        first:   thread1 = OSThread(thread1)    # decorator
        blah blah blah

>>> I don't understand why you use call_ to arm a thread and then rebind
>>> the name. If the call_ function mutates the underlying object then
>>> why do
>>> you have to rebind the name?
>>
>>
>> That is a mistake.  I will change it to remove the assignment:
>>
>>      thread1(10)  # call thread1 to "arm" it
>
> I think using call_ for this is confusing. If you really feel like you
> have to use call_ it would be a lot more clear to use it for starting.
> But perhaps better not to use it at all.
>
> thread1.setParams(10)
> thread1.start()
>
> Explicit is better than implicit!

I will revisit this.