Is Stackless Python DEAD?

[Michael Hudson]

Christian Tismer <tismer at tismer.com> writes:

> >>I agree this is not easy to understand and to implement.
> >>I always was thinking of a framework which makes this
> >>easier, but I didn'tcome up with something suitable.
> >>
> > I've had similar thoughts, but likewise fell short.  I think you could
> > probably do things with m4 that took something readable and spat out
> > stack-neutral C, but it would be a Major Project.
> 
> 
> There must be a simple path. The scheme is always the same.

Yes.

> See the split of functions in stackless map. I hope to find
> a macro set that can create this mess from a couple of fragments.

But C is ****so**** unexpressive on this level.

#define STACKLESS_CALL(FUNC, ARGTUPLE) \
 { PyFrameObject* f = PyFrame_New(); f.next = FUNC; \
   f.nextargs = ARGTUPLE; f.return_to = ???; return; }

You could probably do it in Lisp.

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  ... so the notion that it is meaningful to pass pointers to memory
  objects into which any random function may write random values
  without having a clue where they point, has _not_ been debunked as
  the sheer idiocy it really is.        -- Erik Naggum, comp.lang.lisp