RetroSearch Browse

Sun Feb 11 18:42:59 CET 2007 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070930.html

On 2/10/07, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
> 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?
>

Don't remember the "when".  The "why" has always been that Christian's
hacks into the core were complicated and he didn't even think
integration was worth it.

-Brett

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070930.html below:

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