Possible suggestion for removing the GIL

[Diez B. Roggisch]

Prateek wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Recently there was some talk on removing the GIL and even the BDFL has
> written a blog post on it.
> I was trying to come up with a scalable and backwards compatible
> approach for how to do it.
> 
> I've put my thoughts up in a blog post - and I'd really like to hear
> what the community thinks of it.
> Mainly it revolves around dedicating one core for executing
> synchronized code and doing context switches instead of acquiring/
> releasing locks.

Where is the gain? Having just one core doesn't give you true parallelism -
which is the main reason behind the cries for a GIL-less Python.

Diez