Dear pypyers, I've resumed work on WP9, with the intent to finish it ASAP. Right now I face a little difficulty. I'd like to have your input (essentially Armin's input I guess) on this. Back when I was thinking about the requirements of WP9, esp. the non-deterministic aspects, I thought clonable coroutines/threads would do, fuzzily. Yet obviously these features have been provided and could still be used to achieve my goals, but that is not what I have decided to do since then... What I'd like to know if I have painted myself in a corner with the current design of the logic objectspace. Right now, a computation space is defined as a set of concurrent activities (thread group); in the case of constraint solving, there is one 'main' thread doing the choices, and an army of propagator threads trying to empty the domains. The idea is to associate a garbage collector pool to such a set. I wrote the pool handling code and the clone stuff following as closely as possible what's in modules/_stackless/interp_clonable and friends (most recent versions I think); without a clear understanding of how it works ... (see in objspace/cclp/types.py the Pool class, some client code in space.py and scheduler.py) Then, what happens now is that the cloning routine returns the original thread group. My question is the following : * is there a chance that a peer review and eventual correction/advice on that non-working code can yield a working solution in a reasonnable amount of time ? or * is it time for me to simplify considerably the computation space down to one single thread, so as to directly peruse the (working) coroutine cloning facility ? The later option would entail throwing away ten days of work, and spending a more days to reorganize and rewrite stuff, but can be done while retaining a reasonnable amount of functionnality. (Well, in truth I expect a quick code review by Armin to expose some blunders of mine... Just don't hit too hard my poor head.) Regards, Aurélien.