Jython, GILs and object locking.

[Aahz]

In article <FW7kb.63$MO7.35 at reader1.news.jippii.net>,
Harri Pesonen  <fuerte at sci.fi> wrote:
>Aahz wrote:
>> In article <NmBjb.253$en5.245 at reader1.news.jippii.net>,
>> Harri Pesonen  <fuerte at sci.fi> wrote:
>>> 
>>>Why? Each thread has its own variables, they are not shared, there is no 
>>>need for synchronizing.
>> 
>> Either you don't understand how Python currently works or you're talking
>> about implementing a completely different language that happens to share
>> syntax and some semantics with Python.  Which is it?
>
>Mostly the latter. It would be 99% compatible with the Python syntax, 
>the only difference would be in threading. But it would be 
>free-threading, not pseudo-threading as the current Python.

The point is that it would be at best 80% compatible with current
Python's semantics.  CPython doesn't have "variables", it has names and
objects; all objects are global within a single process.  Changing that
semantic has implications far beyond threading.  There's also the issue
that you keep refusing to address: making Python work with random
third-party libraries that aren't thread-safe or thread-hot.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code."
--Bill Harlan