STINNER Victor <vstin...@python.org> added the comment:
Raymond Hettinger: "Shouldn't this wait to see if the subinterpreters PEP is approved? Because if it isn't, then no chance should be made. We shouldn't change something this fundamental without good cause." I agree that we reached a point where a PEP is needed before pushing further "controversial" changes related to subinterpreters and bpo-1635741 (especially converting static types to heap types (bpo-40077). I plan to write multiple PEPs: * One general PEP about the idea of isolating subinterpreters to be able to run them in parallel, without requesting any specific technical change * One PEP to solve the problem of static types like &PyLong_Type: see bpo-40601 and bpo-43503 * More PEPs for other controversial changes ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue39511> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
