Sophist <pyt...@sodalis.co.uk> added the comment:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18CXhDb1ygxg-YXNBJNzfzZsDFosB5e6BfnXLlejd9l0/edit 1. The steering committee hasn't given the go ahead for this yet, and we have no idea when such a decision will be made nor whether the decision with be yes or no. 2. Even after the decision is made "Removing the GIL will be a large, multi-year undertaking with increased risk for introducing bugs and regressions." 3. The promised performance gains are actually small by comparison to the existing project that Guido is running is hoping to achieve. It is unclear whether the no-gil implementation would impact those gains, and if so whether a small reduction in the large planned performance gains would actually more than wipe out the modest performance gains promised by the no-gil project. 4. Given that this "Removing the GIL will require making trade-offs and taking on substantial risk", it is easy to see that this project could come across an unacceptable risk or insurmountable technical problem at any point and thus fall by the wayside. Taking all of the above points together, I think that there is still merit in considering the pros and cons of a GIL scheduler. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue7946> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
