On Sunday, June 21, 2015 at 6:12:22 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Eric Snow <ericsnow...@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. 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"?

ChrisA


Its good to get our terminology right: Are we talking parallelism or concurrency?
Some references on the distinction:

Bob Harper: https://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/03/17/parallelism-is-not-concurrency/
Rob Pike: http://concur.rspace.googlecode.com/hg/talk/concur.html#landing-slide

[Or if you prefer the more famous https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN_DpYBzKso
]