Hello,

2012/4/11 rklemme (Robert Klemme) <shortcutter / googlemail.com>:
> nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) wrote:
>> It seems natural because the only thread is about to sleep.
>
> I would expect the thread to block indefinitely. Signalling an error hereeems to try to be too smart.  ¨Βφειξ αβσεξγοζ οτθετθςεαδγαιναηιξγοξδιτιοξσ υξδεχθιγδατα ισ ςεαδ ζςον τθρυευ¨ζος εψανπμσιηξαμ θαξδμες©
Interesting.  The error is indeed "false positive."  I did not noticed
signal handler.

But I'm not enthusiastic for your proposal.  It is too conservative.
It will increase too many "false negative."


> But even if an error is signaled here, it is certainly not a deadlock - for that you need at least two threads.  ¨Βθιισ ςατθες σονετθιξμιλε Άοξμβμογλιξη τθςεαδ ισ συσπεξδε¨χιτξο γθαξγε το χαλε υπ©Ά ¨Βαωβε τθατςςος σθουμδ βε γοξτςομμαβμε φισχιτγθε®η®
>
> Thread.single_thread_block_is_error = true # default false

Do you have any practical case where you get bothered by the "false positive"?
If so, please open a feature request ticket with the use case.

-- 
Yusuke Endoh <mame / tsg.ne.jp>