[Python-ideas] [Python-Dev] A bit about the GIL

[Alfredo Solano Martínez]

>     Work breakdown structure?  That's far too organized ;-)  I have an
>     end goal in mind and I'm just slowly hacking my way towards it (at
>     least for the Windows work).

That's called pioneering!

>     The GPU analogy seemed like a good idea when I was writing the PEP,
>     but the implementation has taken a slightly different path.  There
>     is far less emphasis on the notion of vectorized/SIMD-style work; in
>     fact, I haven't implemented any of the 'parallel' type functions yet
>     (like a parallel map/reduce, or equivalents to the parallel stuff
>     exposed by multiprocessing).
>
>     That'll be all stuff to tackle down the track.

My mistake, I guess I got carried away.

>     Well, as the current implementation doesn't really have anything
>     that reflects the GPU vector analogy in that draft PEP, no, not
>     really ;-)

Point taken :)

>     (I should probably clarify again that the PEP I cited was hacked out
>      in a weekend before I started a lick of coding.  The requirements
>      section is definitely useful, as it elicits the constraints I used
>      to drive my design decisions, but all of the sections that allude
>      to implementation details (like binding a thread to each core via
>      thread affinity, not having access to globals, introducing new op-
>      codes to achieve the parallel functionality) don't necessarily map
>      to how I've implemented things now.  Once I've finished the work on
>      Windows I'll do an updated PEP.)
>
>         Trent.

Thanks for the clarification. No need to hurry, indeed.

Alfredo