4 ms·

Does anyone know what came of Sam Gross’s proof of concept that removed the GIL entirely? Is that proposal effectively dead?

js2 4y ago
Looks like it's still active to me: https://github.com/colesbury/nogil/ https://github.com/colesbury/nogil/
- freediver 4y ago
  Tested it this morning and it is actually slower in a combined benchmark than 3.11.
dwrodri 4y ago
I think it's been decided that such a change was so large that it would require a major version change in Python. However, I think that was unauthoritative hearsay probably in another comment thread here on HN. But it stands to reason that removing the GIL will almost certainly change Python's memory model in some ways that could break code in ways that warrant a major version bump.
- KronisLV 4y ago
  > I think it's been decided that such a change was so large that it would require a major version change in Python. Hah, I wonder what else Python 4 could have in it. The Python 2 to 3 migration was hard enough and there were certain challenges along the way (mostly package availability and syntax changes, though the same is happening with new Vue versions) but it seems that in regards to most metrics Python 3 was indeed an improvement, apart from the startup time.
  - rat9988 4y ago
    An improvement that was not worth the cost. I guess many people aren't looking forward python 4.
    - anakaine 4y ago
      I tend to disagree on no other basis than I've found python 3 to be a lot friendlier to use than python 2. Also, a number of scripts I have operate quicker under python 3, not by a lot, but its still a small win.
    - nurettin 4y ago
      Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module. The other half is probably waiting for speed improvements.
      - coldtea 4y ago
        >Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module Hardly. The majority of Python users don't use the typing module.
        nurettin 4y ago
        Oh you went for number of programmers, that isn't what I meant (obviously). Think influence. Think dropbox, uber, amazon. And think stripe trying to add type annotations to ruby. This is what I meant.
        coldtea 4y ago
        Well, Dropbox, Uber and Amazon used Python way before the typing module... and many others, including Google. They might want it in (and helped add it), but it's not what made them use Python.
        nurettin 4y ago
        Okay, I will spell it out: large companies require robust code and typing provides it.
        coldtea 4y ago
  - chpatrick 4y ago
    Can we have block scope?
BerislavLopac 4y ago
AFAIK it was implemented in 3.11. That is, all of it except of the GIL removal itself, which actually decreased performance for single-threaded code; the actual improvement was elsewhere.
- benhoyt 4y ago
  I find that difficult to believe, as the "What's New in Python 3.11" release notes (https://docs.python.org/3.11/whatsnew/3.11.html https://docs.python.org/3.11/whatsnew/3.11.html) don't mention "GIL" or "Global Interpreter Lock" at all. A change of that magnitude would definitely get a mention there.
  - aix1 4y ago
    And also the very first item of the 3.12 plan (the subject of this post) is about tweaking the GIL.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - germandiago 4y ago
    No, it has not been done. I published a post in Reddit related to this experiment that you can check here if you want: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/q8n508/prototype_gilless_cpython_shows_nearly_20x/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/q8n508/prototy...
  - BerislavLopac 4y ago
    Isn't this exactly what I wrote?
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      The GIL removal was implemented, apart from the GIL removal part?
      - 4y ago

js2 4y ago

Looks like it's still active to me: https://github.com/colesbury/nogil/ https://github.com/colesbury/nogil/

freediver 4y ago
Tested it this morning and it is actually slower in a combined benchmark than 3.11.

dwrodri 4y ago

I think it's been decided that such a change was so large that it would require a major version change in Python. However, I think that was unauthoritative hearsay probably in another comment thread here on HN. But it stands to reason that removing the GIL will almost certainly change Python's memory model in some ways that could break code in ways that warrant a major version bump.

KronisLV 4y ago
> I think it's been decided that such a change was so large that it would require a major version change in Python. Hah, I wonder what else Python 4 could have in it. The Python 2 to 3 migration was hard enough and there were certain challenges along the way (mostly package availability and syntax changes, though the same is happening with new Vue versions) but it seems that in regards to most metrics Python 3 was indeed an improvement, apart from the startup time.
- rat9988 4y ago
  An improvement that was not worth the cost. I guess many people aren't looking forward python 4.
  - anakaine 4y ago
    I tend to disagree on no other basis than I've found python 3 to be a lot friendlier to use than python 2. Also, a number of scripts I have operate quicker under python 3, not by a lot, but its still a small win.
  - nurettin 4y ago
    Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module. The other half is probably waiting for speed improvements.
    - coldtea 4y ago
      >Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module Hardly. The majority of Python users don't use the typing module.
      - nurettin 4y ago
        Oh you went for number of programmers, that isn't what I meant (obviously). Think influence. Think dropbox, uber, amazon. And think stripe trying to add type annotations to ruby. This is what I meant.
        coldtea 4y ago
        Well, Dropbox, Uber and Amazon used Python way before the typing module... and many others, including Google. They might want it in (and helped add it), but it's not what made them use Python.
        nurettin 4y ago
        Okay, I will spell it out: large companies require robust code and typing provides it.
        coldtea 4y ago
- chpatrick 4y ago
  Can we have block scope?

BerislavLopac 4y ago

AFAIK it was implemented in 3.11. That is, all of it except of the GIL removal itself, which actually decreased performance for single-threaded code; the actual improvement was elsewhere.

benhoyt 4y ago
I find that difficult to believe, as the "What's New in Python 3.11" release notes (https://docs.python.org/3.11/whatsnew/3.11.html https://docs.python.org/3.11/whatsnew/3.11.html) don't mention "GIL" or "Global Interpreter Lock" at all. A change of that magnitude would definitely get a mention there.
- aix1 4y ago
  And also the very first item of the 3.12 plan (the subject of this post) is about tweaking the GIL.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- germandiago 4y ago
  No, it has not been done. I published a post in Reddit related to this experiment that you can check here if you want: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/q8n508/prototype_gilless_cpython_shows_nearly_20x/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/q8n508/prototy...
- BerislavLopac 4y ago
  Isn't this exactly what I wrote?
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    The GIL removal was implemented, apart from the GIL removal part?
    - 4y ago