Ed Leafe wrote: > On Apr 18, 2008, at 7:00 AM, Ted Roche wrote: > >> The Global Interpreter Lock is a design feature of Python. > > There was an implementation that was tried several years ago that > removed the GIL and instead relied on C-level locking. It ran 2-3 > times slower. > > I've been impressed with what I've been reading about Stackless > Python, but haven't yet had a project to play with it.
In general the versions of Python that remove the GIL run significantly slower with single threads, but faster and faster as the program becomes more multi-threaded. So it is kind of tough for these alternatives to gain traction. It is a Catch-22, really: people build single-threaded (but perhaps multi-process) Python apps because of the GIL, so they are already side-stepping the issue. They'd move to the GIL-free versions except then the common case runs slower. I wonder if in the future we could have it both ways, with some sort of: import gil gil.kill() But I'm just blowing steam: the people working on these issues are so far beyond me I just eat their dust and accept what they say as gospel. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
