Will Python 3.0 remove the global interpreter lock (GIL)

[TheFlyingDutchman]

On Sep 19, 3:41 pm, Paul Boddie <p... at boddie.org.uk> wrote:
> On 19 Sep, 03:09, TheFlyingDutchman <zzbba... at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > How much faster/slower would Greg Stein's code be on today's
> > processors versus CPython running on the processors of the late
> > 1990's? And if you decide to answer, please add a true/false response
> > to this statement - "CPython in the late 1990's ran too slow".
>
> Too slow for what? And what's the fixation with CPython, anyway? Other
> implementations of Python 2.x don't have the GIL. Contrary to popular
> folklore, Jython has been quite a reasonable implementation of Python
> for about half as long as CPython has been around, if you don't mind
> the JVM. I'm sure people have lots of complaints about Jython like
> they do about CPython and the GIL, thinking that complaining about it
> is going to make the situation better, or that they're imparting some
> kind of "wisdom" to which the people who actually wrote the code must
> be oblivious, but nobody is withholding the code from anyone who wants
> to actually improve it.

>
> And there we learn something: that plenty of people are willing to
> prod others into providing them with something that will make their
> lives better, their jobs easier, and their profits greater, but not so
> many are interested in contributing back to the cause and taking on
> very much of the work themselves. Anyway, the response to your
> statement is "false". Now you'll have to provide us with the insight
> we're all missing. Don't disappoint!
>
> Paul

Paul it's a pleasure to see that you are not entirely against
complaints.

The very fastest Intel processor of the last 1990's that I found came
out in October 1999 and had a speed around 783Mhz. Current fastest
processors are something like 3.74 Ghz, with larger caches. Memory is
also faster and larger. It appears that someone running a non-GIL
implementation of CPython today would have significantly faster
performance than a GIL CPython implementation of the late 1990's.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that saying non-GIL CPython is
too slow, while once valid, has become invalid due to the increase in
computing power that has taken place.