Stackless Python, eventual merge?
Martin v. Loewis
martin at v.loewis.de
Thu Sep 19 08:45:26 CEST 2002
Greg Ewing <see_reply_address at something.invalid> writes:
> So, the only way to find out whether a particular
> extension is safe to use in Stackless is to try
That is not true. It is more reliable to inspect the source code.
In general, it is very easy to do so: if there are no callbacks to
Python, the module is stackless-safe.
> That's why I say that I would be nervous about
> using Stackless. Not to say that would stop me
> from using it, but I'd feel nervous while I was
> doing it! :-)
That is perfectly fine with me. The question is whether incorporation
of Stackless Python in the core distribution would already make you
nervous. I can see no rational reason for that.
> Yes, I understand that, and I acknowledge that it
> won't cause any harm to have Stackless in the core
> if the Stackless stuff is switched off by default.
It is better than that: it does not need to be "switched off". Even if
switched on (at build time), it won't start copying slices of the
stack. An application actively has to import one of the modules, and
to call a function in those modules, before you need to get nervous.
More information about the Python-list