4 ms·
Once (or a few times) in 5 years puts this problem into the "not worth(ROI) solving" bucket for me. Those few times, put down the hammer and use some other too
by njharman 9y ago
Once (or a few times) in 5 years puts this problem into the "not worth(ROI) solving" bucket for me.
Those few times, put down the hammer and use some other tool for those not naillike jobs.
- neolefty 9y agoCertainly not worth it for one person to tackle the GIL, but a million people running into it a few times in 5 years, and I think it's economical.
- m_mueller 9y agoHere's the thing: Python, especially 3.6, is such a well rounded language that all other major limitations have IMO been solved already. In my view the GIL is the main one left, and reason to pause and think whether python is a good idea at the start of a project. Removing it is therefore worth it, and would also give a nice additional incentive for everyone to switch to python 3.x, so we don't have to keep on maintaining 2.7 with the same code (i.e. the worst of both worlds).