[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 03:35:29AM +0200, Yotam Rubin wrote: >> Why don't you use Stackless? It's very simple, stable, and solves >> quite completely the problems in writing concurrect code. > > That's a great point -- I'm not necessarily producing this to solve a > problem I'm having. Rather, I think that the new language features in > PEP 342 cry out for a batteries-included library that makes asynchronous > programming both natural and easy. > Of course Stackless isn't quite fully integrated with 2.5 (yet).
When did someone last suggest that Stackless become part of the core CPython implementation, and why didn't that ever happen? regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden Blog of Note: http://holdenweb.blogspot.com See you at PyCon? http://us.pycon.org/TX2007 _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
