Why GIL? (was Re: what's the point of rpython?)
rhamph at gmail.com
Tue Jan 27 21:40:50 CET 2009
On Jan 27, 12:47 pm, Steve Holden <st... at holdenweb.com> wrote:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
> > GIL-less Python (i.e. Jython) already exists and beats CPython in
> > performance a lot of the time, including on single processors.
> > Whether the GIL can be eliminated from CPython without massive rework
> > to every extension module ever written is a separate question, of
> > course. Jython can be viewed a proof of concept.
> <nods>. I think probably the GIL will never be extracted successfully.
> Also IronPython and PyPy (though the latter only in concept for now, I
> believe). Even Guido admits that CPython doesn't necessarily represent
> the dominant future strain ...
IMO it's possible to rewrite only the core while keeping the refcount
API for external compatibility, but a tracing GC API in portable C is
hideous. Enough to make me want to find or make a better
More information about the Python-list