Hey MA, On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:58 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> wrote: > BTW: Some years ago we discussed the idea of pluggable VMs for > Python. Wouldn't U-S be a good motivation to revisit this idea ? > > We could then have a VM based on byte code using a stack > machines, one based on word code using a register machine > and perhaps one that uses the Stackless approach.
What is the usecase for having pluggable VMs? Is the idea that, at runtime, the user would select which virtual machine they want to run their code under? How would the user make that determination intelligently? I think this idea underestimates a) how deeply the current CPython VM is intertwined with the rest of the implementation, and b) the nature of the changes required by these separate VMs. For example, Unladen Swallow adds fields to the C-level structs for dicts, code objects and frame objects; how would those changes be pluggable? Stackless requires so many modifications that it is effectively a fork; how would those changes be pluggable? Collin Winter _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
