On Sunday 24 December 2006 00:19, Andrew MacIntyre wrote:
> Of course, if the project management decide that even the EMX
> support should be removed from the official tree - so be it; I
> will just have to maintain the port outside the official tree.
I feel that so long as there's an active maint
At 8:42 PM +0100 12/2/06, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>Jan Claeys schrieb:
>> Like I said, it's possible to split Python without making things
>> complicated for newbies.
>
>You may have that said, but I don't believe its truth. For example,
>most distributions won't include Tkinter in the "standard" Py
Evgeniy Khramtsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Klaas пиÑеÑ:
>
> > I'm not sure how having python execute code at an arbitrary time would
> > _reduce_ race conditions and/or deadlocks. And if you want to make it
> > safe by executing code that shares no variables or resources, then it
>
On 12/23/06, Andrew MacIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course, if the project management decide that even the EMX support
> should be removed from the official tree - so be it; I will just have
> to maintain the port outside the official tree.
I don't think that's the objective. In general
> The main goal is to prevent threads overhead and problems with race
> conditions and deadlocks.
check out stackless python -- http://www.stackless.com/
-tomer
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Brett> So, here are the platforms I figured we should drop:
>
> ...
> Brett> * OS/2
>
> I'm pretty sure Andrew MacIntyre is still maintaining the OS/2+EMX port:
>
> http://members.pcug.org.au/~andymac/python.html
I am, although I haven't managed a bina
