Heads up: if CPython is JIT faster, it may then be (even more) vulnerable
to branch prediction vulns like Spectre and Meltdown:
https://groups.google.com/g/dev-python/c/67Et2KtpzG4
There's not a PEP for this work either, and one will need to be rebased
first, and are there even merge collisions?
Ah ok thanks for the tip, I re-posted this as
https://discuss.python.org/t/contributing-the-pyston-jit/24195
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 6:02 PM Brett Cannon wrote:
> FYI you will probably get more engagement if you posted this to
> discuss.python.org .
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023, 10:18 Kevin
FYI you will probably get more engagement if you posted this to
discuss.python.org .
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023, 10:18 Kevin Modzelewski wrote:
> Hello all, we on the Pyston team would like to propose the contribution of
> our JIT
>
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023, 11:34 Wes Turner wrote:
> Please consider colesbury/nogil in rebasing?
> https://github.com/colesbury/nogil
>
It's very premature for anyone to concern themselves with Sam's nogil work
when it comes to their own work as PEP 703 has not been sent to the SC (let
alone been
Please consider colesbury/nogil in rebasing?
https://github.com/colesbury/nogil
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023, 1:20 PM Kevin Modzelewski wrote:
> Hello all, we on the Pyston team would like to propose the contribution of
> our JIT
>
