> [Greg Ewing]
>
>>It still strikes me as terribly hairy and dangerous.
>>I would have great difficulty trusting it.
>
[Tim Peters]
> Christian doesn't call his enterprise "Mission Impossible Software" for
> nothing. If you can trust a fabulous hack, what's the point <wink>?
Sourcery goes immediately
Wonders take a little longer :-)
Honestly, it might appear hairy and dangerous. But it is
very few, very well tested code that enables everything.
The old Stackless was really hairy and dangerous, but it
cheated not to do so. Instead it hided in uncomprehensible
code (which I nearly can't understand any longer as well).
What I now have breaks down to the correct decision when
a stack split is bearable (i.e. true for the whole pyhon dll)
and to identify which extension needs a little help.
one-can't-have-Stackless-and-Riskless-same-time - ly y'rs - chris
--
Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer@tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34 home +49 30 802 86 56 pager +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/
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