2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters

["Martin v. Löwis"]

>> There are a number of problems with that approach. The biggest one is
>> that it is theoretical. 
> 
> Not theoretical.  Used successfully in Perl. 

Perhaps it is indeed what Perl does, I know nothing about that.
However, it *is* theoretical for Python. Please trust me that
there are many many many many pitfalls in it, each needing a
separate solution, most likely with no equivalent in Perl.

If you had a working patch, *then* it would be practical.

> Granted Perl is quite a
> different language than Python, but then there are some basic
> similarities in the concepts.

Yes - just as much as both are implemented in C :-(

> Perhaps you should list the problems, instead of vaguely claiming that
> there are a number of them.  Hard to respond to such a vague claim.

As I said: go implement it, and you will find out. Unless you are
really going at an implementation, I don't want to spend my time
explaining it to you.

> But the approach is sound; nearly any monolithic
> program can be turned into a multithreaded program containing one
> monolith per thread using such a technique.

I'm not debating that. I just claim that it is far from simple.

Regards,
Martin