RetroSearch Browse

Sun Feb 11 07:46:06 CET 2007 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070929.html

dustin at v.igoro.us wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 03:35:29AM +0200, Yotam Rubin wrote:
>> Why don't you use Stackless? It's very simple, stable, and solves
>> quite completely the problems in writing concurrect code.
> 
> That's a great point -- I'm not necessarily producing this to solve a
> problem I'm having.  Rather, I think that the new language features in
> PEP 342 cry out for a batteries-included library that makes asynchronous
> programming both natural and easy.  
> 
Of course Stackless isn't quite fully integrated with 2.5 (yet).

When did someone last suggest that Stackless become part of the core 
CPython implementation, and why didn't that ever happen?

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden       +44 150 684 7255  +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd          http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb     http://del.icio.us/steve.holden
Blog of Note:          http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
See you at PyCon?         http://us.pycon.org/TX2007

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070929.html below:

[Python-Dev] Trial balloon: microthreads library in stdlib