Python 2.0 and Stackless

[Toby Dickenson]

Christian Tismer <tismer at appliedbiometrics.com> wrote:

>Toby Dickenson wrote:
>
>> That dicotomy isnt quite the whole truth.
>> 
>> In a post-stackless interpreter all library code has to be aware of
>> the implications of stacklessness, unless it can be sure that it will
>> never be used in a stackless program.
>
>This is not true, resp. not a problem.

Ack - yes. my objections relate to the continuations module, not
stacklessness in itself.

>Continuations should be hidden from normal users, and if
>you change the behavior of the "naive" function, then
>it is up to you. I'm not even yet convinced that these
>functions should be made public at all.

OK... I think we agree.


Toby Dickenson
tdickenson at geminidataloggers.com