[Web-SIG] PEP 444 (aka Web3)

Massimo Di Pierro mdipierro at cs.depaul.edu
Thu Sep 16 21:32:07 CEST 2010

Not sure this discussion belongs here but since you asked:

I think it should have takes three/four more bold steps:
1) address the GIL issue completely by removing reference counting
2) add more support for lightweight threads (like stackless, erlang  
and go)
3) perhaps allow some mechanism for tainting data and do restricted  
4) change name to avoid confusion
... and yet stress that it was almost 100% compatible with existing  
python code.

I think a lot more people would have jumped on it from outside the  
existing community.
The future is in multi core processors and lightweight threads.

Of course I am not a developer and I do realize these things may be  
hard to accomplish.
I also trust Guido's judgement more than my own in this respect so  
consider mine a wish more than a realistic suggestion.


On Sep 16, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Ty Sarna wrote:

> On Sep 16, 2010, at 2:55 PM, Massimo Di Pierro wrote:
>>> My experience in various
>>> communities suggests that naming the new totally-bw-incompat thing  
>>> the
>>> same as the old thing weakens both the new thing and the old thing,
>> I share the same experience.
> Interesting. Do you feel that Python 3.x should have been named  
> something other than Python?
> I think that would rather have weakened both 3.x and 2.x by  
> suggesting a fork, placing the two in competition, when the goal was  
> to have one supersede the other, as is also the case here.

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list