On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 13:14, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:27:50 +0100 > Thomas Wouters <tho...@python.org> wrote: > > > > And it may not be immediately obvious from Mark's plans, but as far as we > > can tell, the proposal is for speeding up pure-Python code. It will do > > little for code that is hampered, speed-wise, by CPython's object model, or > > threading model, or the C API. We have no idea how much this will actually > > matter to users. Making pure-Python code execution faster is always > > welcome, but it depends on the price. It may not be a good place to spend > > $500k or more, and it may even not be considered worth the implementation > > complexity. > > FWIW, I think it would definitely be worth it. Performance will be a > *major* hurdle for Python in the years to come (the other hurdle being > ease of deployment).
I agree on both of these points, and I would love to see funding be available for both of these items. But having said that, I agree with the SC's position here. Getting funding is only one part of the problem, project management and co-ordination is absolutely necessary (we're talking about a $2M project!) and would be a significant overhead. Even if the cost of such resource could come from the funding, there's still a significant cashflow problem with committing that resource prior to getting funding, as well as a risk that the funding doesn't materialise and the investment is lost. I hope that we can find some way to realise the benefits Mark has identified, but I can see why the SC has to prioritise the way they have. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/4NY6QKSD7375B24EM3MBI4HDHDGQRIB7/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
