Parallelization on muli-CPU hardware?

Aahz aahz at
Thu Oct 7 19:02:17 CEST 2004

In article <1glatga.8upk9brifr2qN%aleaxit at>,
Alex Martelli <aleaxit at> wrote:
>Aahz <aahz at> wrote:
>> The problem is that CPython doesn't have thread-local storage.
>In 2.4 it does -- see threading.local documentation at
><> (and
>even better, the docstring of the new _threading_local module).

IIUC, that's not thread-local storage in the sense that I'm using the
term (and which I believe is standard usage).  Values created with
thread-local storage module are still allocated on the heap, and it's
still possible to use introspection to access thread-local data in
another thread.

Don't get me wrong; I think it's a brilliant addition to Python.
Unfortunately, it doesn't help with the real issues with making the
Python core free-threaded (or anything more fine-grained than the GIL).
Aahz (aahz at           <*>

WiFi is the SCSI of the 21st Century -- there are fundamental technical
reasons for sacrificing a goat.  (with no apologies to John Woods)

More information about the Python-list mailing list