On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 14:13:03 +0100 Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Did you try to take into account the envisioned project for adding a > "complete" GC and removing the GIL?
Sorry, I was misremembering the details. Sam Gross' proposal (posted here on 07/10/2021) doesn't switch to a "complete GC", but it changes reference counting to a more sophisticated scheme (which includes immortalization of objects): https://docs.google.com/document/d/18CXhDb1ygxg-YXNBJNzfzZsDFosB5e6BfnXLlejd9l0/edit Regards Antoine. > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:12:07 -0700 > Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm still hoping to land a per-interpreter GIL for 3.11. There is > > still a decent amount of work to be done but little of it will require > > solving any big problems: > > > > * pull remaining static globals into _PyRuntimeState and PyInterpreterState > > * minor updates to PEP 554 > > * finish up the last couple pieces of the PEP 554 implementation > > * maybe publish a companion PEP about per-interpreter GIL > > > > There are also a few decisions to be made. I'll open a couple of > > other threads to get feedback on those. Here I'd like your thoughts > > on the following: > > > > Do we need a PEP about per-interpreter GIL? > > > > I haven't thought there would be much value in such a PEP. There > > doesn't seem to be any decision that needs to be made. At best the > > PEP would be an explanation of the project, where: > > > > * the objective has gotten a lot of support (and we're working on > > addressing the concerns of the few objectors) > > * most of the required work is worth doing regardless (e.g. improve > > runtime init/fini, eliminate static globals) > > * the performance impact is likely to be a net improvement > > * it is fully backward compatible and the C-API is essentially unaffected > > > > So the value of a PEP would be in consolidating an explanation of the > > project into a single document. It seems like a poor fit for a PEP. > > > > (You might wonder, "what about PEP 554?" I purposefully avoided any > > discussion of the GIL in PEP 554. It's purpose is to expose > > subinterpreters to Python code.) > > > > However, perhaps I'm too close to it all. I'd like your thoughts on the > > matter. > > > > Thanks! > > > > -eric > > > _______________________________________________ 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/HSPKKNQ7H24EPI2XPKKZLMXTREOB47FB/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
