Hi Andrew, hi all,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 18:23, Andrew Francis <andrewfr_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Indeed, and it was around 2007, so I expect the authors to have been
>>involved in completely different things for quite some time now...
>>But I could try to contact them anyway.
>
> Communications is good :-)
I'm also thinking about writing a short paper collecting things I said
and think on various blog posts. A kind of "position paper". What do
others think of this idea?
> My PyPy knowledge is still sketchy but I am changing that. I do understand
> the Twisted reactor model
> (thanks to my 2008 Pycon Talk) so I could follow discussions in that area.
> Is this discussed on IRC?
This is not discussed a lot right now. But it is apparently
relatively easy to adapt the epoll-based Twisted reactor to use the
'transaction' module. (Again, this module is present in the stm-gc
branch; look for lib_pypy/transaction.py for the interface, and
pypy/module/transaction/* for the Python implementation on top of STM
as exposed by RPython.) This 'transaction' module is also meant to be
used directly, for example in this kind of Python code:
for n in range(...):
do_something(n)
If each call to do_something() has "reasonable chances" to be
independent from other calls, and if the order doesn't matter, then it
can be rewritten as:
for n in range(...):
transaction.add(do_something, n)
transaction.run()
In addition, each transaction can add more transactions that will be
run after it. So if you want to play with lib_pypy/stackless.py to
add calls to 'transaction', feel free :-) Maybe it will show that a
slightly different API is required from the 'transaction' module; I
don't really know so far.
A bientôt,
Armin.
_______________________________________________
pypy-dev mailing list
pypy-dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
