Stackless python + official python ?

[Cameron Laird]

In article <lkd6w5vbm3.fsf at pc150.maths.bris.ac.uk>,
Michael Hudson  <mwh at python.net> wrote:
>Pekka Niiranen <krissepu at vip.fi> writes:
>
>> After reading "Continuations and Stackless Python" by Christian
>> Tismer I started wondering if there are any plans to merge his
>> efforts to official Python release ?
>
>Not at present, I believe.
>
>> Or is it too late because user and application base of the language
>> are allready so wide that pure engineering decisions for the
>> language development are impossible ?
>
>The original implementation was too intrusive and baroque to be
>considered (albeit an amazing bit of work).  The current one relies on
>assembly tricks; it's unlikely that such things would be tolerated in
>the core.
>
>For much more on the subject, feel free to hit google.
			.
			.
			.
Let me say this a different way:  Christian, and
even more than he, several of the Stackless users,
pushed *hard* to move Stackless into the core Py-
thon distribution.  At one time last year, I
sincerely believed that a substantial part of
Stackless would appear in a 2.1 or so release.

Guido was reluctant all along; more precisely, he
had specific and important reservations.  Eventu-
ally, Christian backed Stackless out of 2.x
development.  I don't think he's particularly on
a trajectory to bring it back to the core distri-
bution.

Maybe Guido'll decide Stackless belongs in.  Maybe
Christian will decide he wants to do whatever is
necessary to get Stackless in.  More likely, I
think, is that Christian continues to maintain
Stackless as an alternate implementation.
-- 

Cameron Laird <Cameron at Lairds.com>
Business:  http://www.Phaseit.net
Personal:  http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html