On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:39 PM Victor Stinner <vstin...@python.org> wrote:
> I have concerns about shared data.
>
> The current implementation of CPython and subinterpreters still shares
> singletons. Moreover, I understand that the PEP proposes to first
> directly share PyObject between subinterpreters, like bytes objects.
Hmm, the PEP explicitly says:
Note that objects are not shared between interpreters since they
are tied to the interpreter in which they were created. Instead, the
objects' data is passed between interpreters. See the Shared data
section for more details about sharing between interpreters.
> Isolating subinterpreters is a big task and so all issues cannot be
> solved at once. So I am not with making some compromises for a first
> milestone.
+1
To me, one of the most important things is to get the functionality
out there as soon as possible, even if it is limited (but not
useless).
> The problem is to define which semantics can be exposed in the public
> API for the first milestone.
>
> [snip]
>
> What is the plan for Python 3.9? What semantics would be exposed in Python
> 3.9?
>
> Should we wait until these questions are answered before making the API
> public?
The PEP proposes minimal functionality. We can relax that in future
versions of Python on a case-by-case basis.
If you are specifically referring to object sharing, the PEP already
says there is none.
-eric
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/QVCKZVUECJQ3DCXO2GQ7HZA4HNAWB734/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
