Re: [Python-Dev] Class decorators can't be pickled, which breaks multiprocessing and concurrent.futures. Any plans of improving this?

2018-08-11 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
11.08.18 23:08, Santiago Basulto пише: Hello folks! I'm using the `concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor` with a couple of functions that have been decorated with a class decorator. Both `concurrent.futures` and `multiprocessing` breaks because "the object's can't be pickled". There's a

[Python-Dev] Class decorators can't be pickled, which breaks multiprocessing and concurrent.futures. Any plans of improving this?

2018-08-11 Thread Santiago Basulto
Hello folks! I'm using the `concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor` with a couple of functions that have been decorated with a class decorator. Both `concurrent.futures` and `multiprocessing` breaks because "the object's can't be pickled". There's a really simple fix for this, which is just,

Re: [Python-Dev] Can we split PEP 489 (extension module init) ?

2018-08-11 Thread Stefan Behnel
Petr Viktorin schrieb am 10.08.2018 um 13:48: > Would this be better than a flag + raising an error on init? Ok, I've implemented this in Cython for now, to finally move the PEP-489 support forward. The somewhat annoying drawback is that module reloading previously *seemed* to work, simply

Re: [Python-Dev] Let's change to C API!

2018-08-11 Thread Stefan Behnel
Antoine Pitrou schrieb am 11.08.2018 um 15:19: > On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 19:15:11 +0200 Armin Rigo wrote: >> Currently, the C API only allows Psyco-style JITting (much slower than >> PyPy). All three other points might not be possible at all without a >> seriously modified C API. Why? I have no

Re: [Python-Dev] Let's change to C API!

2018-08-11 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Hi Armin, On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 19:15:11 +0200 Armin Rigo wrote: > Currently, the C API only allows Psyco-style JITting (much slower than > PyPy). All three other points might not be possible at all without a > seriously modified C API. Why? I have no proof, but only > circumstantial

Re: [Python-Dev] Can we split PEP 489 (extension module init) ?

2018-08-11 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
> Would this be better than a flag + raising an error on init? Exactly. PEP 489 only says "Extensions using the new initialization scheme are expected to support subinterpreters". What's wrong with raising an exception when the module is initialized the second time? Jeroen.