On 25 May 2017, at 19:03, Eric Snow firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Guido van Rossum email@example.com wrote:
Hm... Curiously, I've heard a few people at PyCon
I'd love to get in touch with them and discuss the situation. I've spoken with Graham Dumpleton on several occasions about subinterpreters and what needs to be fixed.
mention they thought subinterpreters were broken
There are a number of related long-standing bugs plus a few that I created in the last year or two. I'm motivated to get these resolved so that the multi-core Python project can take full advantage of subinterpreters without worry.
As well, there are known limitations to using extension modules in subinterpreters. However, only extension modules that rely on process globals (rather than leveraging PEP 384, etc.) are affected, and we can control for that more carefully using the protocol introduced by PEP 489.
There also the PyGILState APIs (PEP 311), those assume there’s only one interpreter.