Mention the free-threaded build in thread safety docs #283
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@indygreg gentle ping on this - also if you're interested in further work along these lines I can look at ways to avoid segfaults without introducing runtime overhead. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is towards fully supporting the free-threaded build. I'm hoping this helps assuage the uncertainty described in c.f. #276 (review).
I think just documenting that the library is thread-unsafe is a minimal possible approach for supporting the free-threaded build. In this PR I implement that and document the limitations of sharing (de)compression contexts between threads, elaborating on the content that's already there for the GIL-enabled build.
In principle we can probably turn possible seg faults for not heeding these warnings into runtime exceptions, but I don't think that changes the content of what I'm proposing here much, so I thought I'd propose this first.