Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > > I'd hate to let a fundamental flaw like this go through simply because > > someone somewhere somewhen set a completely synthetic deadline. > > No, it's not like that. We set the deadline so that we are able to > cancel discussions like this one. It would be possible to change the > schedule, if we would agree that it was for a good cause - which we don't.
I do appreciate that, and also what you and Antoine are saying. > > If threading performance wasn't broken on multicore, I'd agree with you. > > But right now, *everyone* has to be an expert just to use Python 2.x > > effectively on modern multicore hardware > > Not at all. Just use the multiprocessing module instead, and be done. > It's really easy to use if you already managed to understand threads. But that's just the problem. Most folks don't use "threads", they use a higher-level abstraction like the nltk library. Does it use threads? Has its owner ported it to py3k? Has its owner ported it to the multiprocessing module? I have to be an expert to know. I'll stop talking about this now... At least, here. Apparently we only need to fix this for OS X. Bill _______________________________________________ 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
