This is now in git master after being merged by Victor in
https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/3385.
Regards
Antoine.
On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:36:51 +0200
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It's 2017 and we are still allowing people to compile CPython without
> threads support. It adds some
I've proposed a PEP 11 update in this PR:
https://github.com/python/peps/pull/394
Regards
Antoine.
On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:36:51 +0200
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It's 2017 and we are still allowing people to compile CPython without
> threads support. It adds some complication in sever
2017-09-06 22:19 GMT+02:00 Berker Peksağ :
> Do we still have buildbots for testing the --without-threads option?
We had such buildbot once, but it's gone. I just removed its unused
class from the buildbot configuration:
https://github.com/python/buildmaster-config/commit/091f52aa05a8977966796ba3e
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> I'm strongly in favor of dropping this option from Python 3.7. It
> would remove a lot of code!
+1
Do we still have buildbots for testing the --without-threads option?
--Berker
___
Python-Dev mai
My take on platforms without thread support is that they should provide a
their own fake/green/virtual threading APIs. I don't know how practical
that thought actually is for things like web assembly but I'm with Antoine
here. The maintenance burden for --without-threads builds is a pain I'd
love
Certainly, I understand it can be burdensome. I suppose I can use 3.6
branch for the initial port, so it shouldn't be an issue.
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 10:50:11 -0700
> Ethan Smith wrote:
> > I think this is useful as it can make porting easie
On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 10:50:11 -0700
Ethan Smith wrote:
> I think this is useful as it can make porting easier. I am using it in my
> attempts to cross compile CPython to WebAssembly (since WebAssembly in its
> MVP does not support threading).
The problem is that the burden of maintenance falls on u
I think this is useful as it can make porting easier. I am using it in my
attempts to cross compile CPython to WebAssembly (since WebAssembly in its
MVP does not support threading).
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> I made an experimental PR to remove support for threads
I made an experimental PR to remove support for threads-less builds:
https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/3385
The next effect is to remove almost 2000 lines of code (including many
#ifdef sections in C code).
Regards
Antoine.
On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:36:51 +0200
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Hello
On 2017-09-05 09:42, Victor Stinner wrote:
> I proposed to drop the --without-threads option multiple times. I
> worked on tiny and cheap embedded devices and we used Python *with*
> threads for concurrency. Many Python features require threads, like
> asyncio and multiprocessing. Also subprocess.c
I proposed to drop the --without-threads option multiple times. I
worked on tiny and cheap embedded devices and we used Python *with*
threads for concurrency. Many Python features require threads, like
asyncio and multiprocessing. Also subprocess.communicate() on Windows,
no?
I'm strongly in favor
Hello,
It's 2017 and we are still allowing people to compile CPython without
threads support. It adds some complication in several places
(including delicate parts of our internal C code) without a clear
benefit. Do people still need this?
Regards
Antoine.
__
12 matches
Mail list logo
