Hi Martijn, On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 19:24 +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote: > Hi there, > > Just throwing in my little bit: any change that is made that would > make it easier to run Python 2 and Python 3 interpretors in the same > process would interesting, as I'm still vaguely dreaming (nothing > more) of a combined interpreter that can run both Python 2 and Python > 3 code.
Is there a strong reason you want this in the same process? If not you might look into using execnet [1] for connecting python2 and python3 interpreters which then run in two separate processes. One can build something higher level on top of the base execnet communication along the lines of your "python3_import" suggestion. It seems you anyway need largely disconnected interpreter states. On a sidenote, Quora uses execnet to connect python2 and PyPy [2]. best, holger [1] http://codespeak.net/execnet/example/hybridpython.html [2] http://www.quora.com/Quora-Infrastructure/Did-Quoras-switch-to-PyPy-result-in-increased-memory-consumption > Regards, > > Martijn > _______________________________________________ > pypy-dev mailing list > pypy-dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev > _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
