17:05 -> Would someone please explain to me how is that not breaking C extensions? Isn't it possible to create a system that implies an "auto-lock arround c ext

17:05 -> Would someone please explain to me how is that not breaking C extensions? Isn't it possible to create a system that implies an "auto-lock arround c extensions" (29:53) on the current C extensions but would allow future non-GIL safe extensions to run freely?