On Aug 10, 5:57 am, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Justin T. wrote: > > Hello, > > > The nice thing is that this requires a fairly doable amount of work. > > First, stackless should be integrated into the core. Then there should > > be an effort to remove the reliance on the GIL for python threading. > > After that, advanced features like moving tasklets amongst threads > > should be explored. I can imagine a world where a single python web > > application is able to redistribute its millions of requests amongst > > thousands of threads without the developer ever being aware that the > > application would eventually scale. An efficient and natively multi- > > threaded implementation of python will be invaluable as cores continue > > to multiply like rabbits. > > Be my guest, if it's so simple. > > > > regards > Steve > -- > Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 > Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com > Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden > --------------- Asciimercial ------------------ > Get on the web: Blog, lens and tag the Internet > Many services currently offer free registration > ----------- Thank You for Reading -------------
I've been watching this Intel TBB thing and it sounds like it might be useful for threading. This fellow claims that he's going to play with SWIG and may use it to create bindings to TBB for Python, although he's starting with Perl: http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/07/26/threading-building-blocks-and-c/ Dunno what the license ramifications are though. Mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
