[Python-ideas] stdlib with its own release cycle ?

[Michael Foord]

2009/10/26 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>

> Michael Foord wrote:
> > If (for example) Unladen Swallow were to (eventually) be successful in
> > removing the GIL and moved away from reference counting then it would be
> > possible to retain binary API (ABI) compatibility with extensions
> > written for 'standard' CPython.
> >
> > The GIL is simply faked. IronPython code is not restricted by the GIL
> > but only one code path into Ironclad can acquire the GIL at a time.
> >
> > For reference counting we have a hybrid system keeping 'bridge' objects
> > alive whilst the C extension has a reference to them but they may or may
> > not be in use from the IronPython side.
>
> Something I've long been curious about (but never even come close to
> having the time to research) is the idea of using CPython extensions
> with PyPy. It sounds like that would involve an effort in a similar vein
> to porting Ironclad to Jython (i.e. porting the back end to PyPy instead).
>
>
Porting the Ironclad core to RPython using the PyPy FFI would presumably be
possible.

Last time I spoke to the PyPy devs about it they said they had a different
approach in mind that would give them source compatibility but not binary
compatibility. I guess reinventing the wheel is the core motivation of PyPy
so I guess they can be forgiven. ;-)

Michael



> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>



-- 
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20091027/7cb052f0/attachment.html>