On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 13:14, Antoine Pitrou
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:27:50 +0100 Thomas Wouters
wrote: And it may not be immediately obvious from Mark's plans, but as far as we can tell, the proposal is for speeding up pure-Python code. It will do little for code that is hampered, speed-wise, by CPython's object model, or threading model, or the C API. We have no idea how much this will actually matter to users. Making pure-Python code execution faster is always welcome, but it depends on the price. It may not be a good place to spend $500k or more, and it may even not be considered worth the implementation complexity.
FWIW, I think it would definitely be worth it. Performance will be a *major* hurdle for Python in the years to come (the other hurdle being ease of deployment).
I agree on both of these points, and I would love to see funding be available for both of these items. But having said that, I agree with the SC's position here. Getting funding is only one part of the problem, project management and co-ordination is absolutely necessary (we're talking about a $2M project!) and would be a significant overhead. Even if the cost of such resource could come from the funding, there's still a significant cashflow problem with committing that resource prior to getting funding, as well as a risk that the funding doesn't materialise and the investment is lost. I hope that we can find some way to realise the benefits Mark has identified, but I can see why the SC has to prioritise the way they have. Paul