Stackless Python, eventual merge?

[Delaney, Timothy]

> From: martin at v.loewis.de [mailto:martin at v.loewis.de]
> 
> It is better than that: it does not need to be "switched off". Even if
> switched on (at build time), it won't start copying slices of the
> stack. An application actively has to import one of the modules, and
> to call a function in those modules, before you need to get nervous.

The problem of course is if you import a module which itself uses stackless.

Currently, there are limited ways in which simply importing a module can
kill Python. This would add another way. Obviously all such modules should
be documented, but ...

I'm not saying I'm against Stackless - quite on the contrary. However, it is
something which needs to be considered *very* carefully.

At the very least, PyChecker should warn about Stackless (even if it never
gets into the core ;)

Tim Delaney