Stackless Python, eventual merge?

Michael Schneider michaels at
Mon Sep 16 05:09:49 CEST 2002

David Abrahams wrote:

>"Christian Tismer" <tismer at> wrote in message
>news:mailman.1032107006.6411.python-list at
>>The changes to Python are also so small now, that
>>it doesn't matter if it will be merged or not.
>>Porting Stackless to a new Python is a matter of a few
>>hours. You may rely on getting a Stackless version
>>of any new Python version in almost no time.
>I think it still matters. You don't want people who need stackless'
>capabilities to have to use a non-standard Python forever, do you?

I am a little confused by this.   I use threads, but threads must be 
compiled in.
This has been that the same since I downloaded my first python in '93 (Very
good language Guido :-)

Could someone please explain to a "confused" python user. Why the 
current version of
stackless python would not be distributed like threads???

Thanks to all for a great language!!!!!!!!!!!!!


>           David Abrahams * Boost Consulting
>dave at *

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Python-list mailing list