> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:52 AM, Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rod...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>  The main problem I have with this PR is that it seems to introduce 8 brand 
> new APIs, but since there is no doc, docstrings or tests it's unclear which 
> ones are supposed to be used, how or whether they are supposed to supersede 
> or deprecate older (slower) ones involving inter process communication.

The release manger already opined that if tests and docs get finished for the 
second alpha, he prefers not to have a reversion and would rather on build on 
top of what already shipped in the first alpha.  FWIW, the absence of docs 
isn't desirable but it isn't atypical.  PEP 572 code landed without the docs. 
Docs for dataclasses arrived much after the code. The same was true for the 
decimal module. Hopefully, everyone will team up with Davin and help him get 
the ball over the goal line.

BTW, this is a feature we really want.  Our multicore story for Python isn't a 
good one.  Due to the GIL, threading usually can't exploit multiple cores for 
better performance.  Async has lower overhead than threading but achieves its 
gains by keeping all the data in a single process.  That leaves us with 
multiprocessing where the primary obstacle has been the heavy cost of moving 
data between processes.  If that cost can be reduced, we've got a winning story 
for multicore.

This patch is one of the better things that is happening to Python.  Aside from 
last week's procedural missteps and communication issues surrounding the 
commit, the many months of prior work on this have been stellar. How about we 
stop using a highly public forum to pile up on Davin (being the subject of a 
thread like this can be a soul crushing experience).  Right now, he could 
really use some help and support from everyone on the team.


Raymond


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to