On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 07:59:43PM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote: > Andy Sy wrote: > > > Does this mean that Py3K intends to reuse major portions of > > Python 2.x's implementation? > > I expect that almost all of it will be reused. >
Couldn't PyPy be considered an interesting contender ? > The difficulty with improving on the current generator > model is that the only way to do any better is to use > full coroutines. That means either using threads (which > you can do now if you want), or turning the whole > implementation inside-out in the manner of the original > Stackless, which would break all existing C extensions > and force writers of future extensions to use a very > convoluted API. Sorry to jump in like this, but what about the *current* stackless ? Does it also break all existing C extensions ... ? (I guess I should do my homework and ask the stackless people, but ...) > > If there were any easy way to improve generators, it > would already have been done by now. > > -- > Greg > _______________________________________________ > Python-3000 mailing list > Python-3000@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
