Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

John Nagle wrote: > >It would be "un-Pythonic" to have real concurrency in Python. >You wouldn't be able to patch code running in one thread from >another thread. Some of the dynamic features of Python >would break. If you want fine-grained concurrency, you need >controlled isolation betwee

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

Dan Stromberg, 01.07.2012 21:28: > On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Thomas Jollans wrote: >> On 07/01/2012 08:44 PM, Dan Stromberg wrote: >>> IronPython, sadly, lacks a python standard library. >> >> Beg pardon? >> >> https://github.com/IronLanguages/main/tree/master/External.LCA_RESTRICTED/Languag

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

On 7/1/2012 10:51 AM, dmitrey wrote: hi all, are there any information about upcoming availability of parallel computations in CPython without modules like multiprocessing? I mean something like parallel "for" loops, or, at least, something without forking with copying huge amounts of RAM each t

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

Thomas Jollans wrote: >There is, of course, Stackless Python. >http://stackless.com/ Stackless Python doesn't really address the original poster's problem as the GIL still effectively limits Python code running in one thread at a time. Ross Ridge -- l/

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

On 07/01/2012 09:28 PM, Dan Stromberg wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Thomas Jollans > wrote: > > On 07/01/2012 08:44 PM, Dan Stromberg wrote: > > IronPython, sadly, lacks a python standard library. > > > Beg pardon? > > > https://githu

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Thomas Jollans wrote: > On 07/01/2012 08:44 PM, Dan Stromberg wrote: > > IronPython, sadly, lacks a python standard library. > > > Beg pardon? > > > https://github.com/IronLanguages/main/tree/master/External.LCA_RESTRICTED/Languages/IronPython/27/Lib > Perhaps thi

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

On 7/1/2012 1:53 PM, Thomas Jollans wrote: > As far as I can tell, there are no concrete plans to integrate > concurrency better, or get rid of the GIL, at the moment. To quote > http://wiki.python.org/moin/GlobalInterpreterLock > > """Getting rid of the GIL is an occasional topic on the python-

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

On 07/01/2012 08:44 PM, Dan Stromberg wrote: > IronPython, sadly, lacks a python standard library. Beg pardon? https://github.com/IronLanguages/main/tree/master/External.LCA_RESTRICTED/Languages/IronPython/27/Lib -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

On 07/01/2012 07:51 PM, dmitrey wrote: > hi all, > are there any information about upcoming availability of parallel > computations in CPython without modules like multiprocessing? I mean > something like parallel "for" loops, or, at least, something without > forking with copying huge amounts of

Re: when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

If something happens with this for CPython, it'll likely come from Pypy developers first. They seem to be interested in doing things in a way that is (or can be made) compatible with CPython. If you want to help them along, they're taking donations to fund the work, or you could donate your own t

when "normal" parallel computations in CPython will be implemented at last?

hi all, are there any information about upcoming availability of parallel computations in CPython without modules like multiprocessing? I mean something like parallel "for" loops, or, at least, something without forking with copying huge amounts of RAM each time and possibility to involve unpiclab