On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> wrote:
* disallow forking within subinterpreters
I love the idea as a whole (if only because the detractors can be told "Just use subinterpreters, then you get concurrency"), but this seems like a tricky restriction. That means no subprocess.Popen, no shelling out to other applications. And I don't know what of other restrictions might limit any given program.
This is just something I'm thinking about. To be honest, forking probably won't be a problem. Furthermore, if there were any restriction it would likely just be on forking Python (a la multiprocessing). However, I doubt there will be a need to pursue such a restriction. As I said, there are still a lot of open questions and subtle details to sort out.
Will it feel like subinterpreters are "write your code according to these tight restrictions and it'll work", or will it be more of "most programs will run in parallel just fine, but there are a few things to be careful of"?
I expect that will be somewhat the case no matter what. The less restrictions the better, though. :) It's a balancing act because I expect that with some initial restrictions we can land the feature sooner. Then we could look into how to relax the restrictions. I just want to be careful that we don't paint ourselves into a corner in that regard. -eric