On 11 September 2017 at 18:02, Koos Zevenhoven <k7ho...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The line between it and the "CPython Runtime" is fuzzy for both >> practical and historical reasons, but the regular Python CLI will >> always have a "first created, last destroyed" main interpreter, simply >> because we don't really gain anything significant from eliminating it >> as a concept. > > I fear that emphasizing the main interpreter will lead to all kinds of > libraries/programs that somehow unnecessarily rely on some or all tasks > being performed in the main interpreter. Then you'll have a hard time > running two of them in parallel in the same process, because you don't have > two main interpreters.
You don't need to fear this scenario, since it's a description of the status quo (and it's the primary source of overstated claims about subinterpreters being "fundamentally broken"). So no, not everything will be subinterpreter-friendly, just as not everything in Python is thread-safe, and not everything is portable across platforms. That's OK - it just means we'll aim to make as many things as possible implicitly subinterpreter-friendly, and for everything else, we'll aim to minimise the adjustments needed to *make* things subinterpreter friendly. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
