On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > > Hello again, > > Brett Cannon <brett <at> python.org> writes: >> >> I think it's worth it. Removal of the GIL is a totally open-ended problem >> with no solution in sight. This, on the other hand, is a performance benefit >> now. I say move forward with this. If it happens to be short-lived because >> some actually figures out how to remove the GIL then great, but is that >> really going to happen between now and Python 3.2? I doubt it. > > Based on this whole discussion, I think I am going to merge the new GIL work > into the py3k branch, with priority requests disabled. > > If you think this is premature or uncalled for, or if you just want to review > the changes before making a judgement, please voice up :) +1 Good idea. Thats the best way to make sure this work gets anywhere. It can be iterated on from there if anyone has objections.
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