>Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:04:44 -0500
>From: Richard Tew <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: [Stackless] Blog posts related to Stackless and
benchmarking
>To: Phoenix Sol <[email protected]>
>Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>Message-ID:
> <[email protected]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>While Stackless may have faster scheduling and allow for code
>naturally written without boilerplate to unknowingly block within any
>called function, there's a lot to be said for being able to run
>against standard Python.
Hi Richard:
Some thoughts. Although I have not be methodical, I have run tests between pure
Twisted programmes, programmes that use both Stackless and Twisted, and
programmes where I trade off tasklets/channels for deferreds. So far, the
performance difference is low (between %5 and 10%). My conclusion is that
implementing the scheduling in C, makes a substantial difference.
A selling point of Stackless is that it is a superset of Python. You and the
folks at CCP Games do a great job of keeping Stackless in sync with CPython.
And the PyPy guys are chartering a course for the future. The only reason I
keep a CPython and a Stackless implementation handy is sometimes I want a
debugger to step through complicated code. I believe if a little more
documentation existed concerning the nitty-gritty of tasklet internals, it
would make it easier for third-parties to integrate Stackless into existing
frameworks. Thus giving system administrators and eventually distro makers
fewer reasons not to stock Stackless Python from the get-go.
Cheers,
Andrew
_______________________________________________
Stackless mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
