In a message of Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:18:07 +1100, William ML Leslie writes: >Where did you want this discussion to go, Laura? It looks like you >wanted to talk about the specific problems that need to be dealt with >while removing the GIL, but it seems to have disintegrated into the >same "concurrency model X is better than concurrency model Y" free for >all that regularly seems to happen on this list. Regardless of the >API that runtimes written with the translation toolkit may provide, >getting rid of the GIL is a precursor to the implementations of most >of these models. > >-- >William Leslie
I'm at a Sprint at PyCON, as are many of the people I think would be best at answering these specific questions. So it is not surprising that they are not answering them now. I, myself, am personally interested in finding out how languages I have never looked at do these things, because I expect it to influence how one gets rid of the GIL. I was hoping to have an insight as to how one could avoid going the route of reimplementing fine grained locks everywhere, pervasively, all through the codebase. But all I am seeing now is more evidence that this is impossible. Laura _______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
