Gordon McMillan wrote:
>
> But I can't figure out what the h*ll is being PEPed.
> ...
> Assuming that stackless can get along with GC,
As long as frames are not considered for GC, don't worry about GC.
> ceval.c and grammar changes (or Christian can make it so), it seems to
> me the PEPable issue is whether the value this can add is
> worth the price of a less linear implementation.
There's an essay + paper available, slides and an implementation.
What's the problem about formalizing this in a PEP and addressing
the controversial issues + explaining how they are dealt with?
I mean, if you're a convinced long-time Stackless user and everything
is obvious for you, this PEP should try to convince the rest of us --
so write it down and ask no more <wink>.
--
Vladimir MARANGOZOV | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4