zabbadabba

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by zabbadabba 11y ago

   It is curious how they completely revamped Python making most Python3 code incompatible with Python2 and yet they wanted to preserve C API "compatibility". Compatibility with what? Most Python3 modules had to be rewritten anyway -
2. 2.▲
   by zabbadabba 11y ago

   The problem is that thread local storage is slow. It's an extra layer of indirection. Also, thread safety is just one concern in the GIL debate. One should be able to support many low-overhead independent interpreter instances on a sin
3. 3.▲
   by zabbadabba 11y ago

   A one time cost of 100 hours of work to put the globals into an interpreter struct and fix the C API to have a PythonInterpreter* as the first argument to every function would be a very small price to pay compared to the decade-long debates
4. 4.▲
   by zabbadabba 11y ago

   Avoiding fixing the C API for the sake of backwards compatibility is the reason for the GIL mess. Python 3 had a chance to correct the API situation since they were starting anew, but it didn't happen. All these API half measures are j
5. 5.▲
   by zabbadabba 11y ago

   This proposal is needlessly complicated. All Python has to do is put all interpreter state into a single struct to allow for completely independent interpreter instances. Then the GIL can be discarded altogether. And finally they have to ch