To clarify a little, this patch does not eliminate the GIL it just schedules the next thread to acquire the GIL using the BFS scheduling algorithm.
Also and perhaps more importantly this has not been incorporated into any version of python. It is just a patch on the bug tracker and realistically I doubt it has much chance of being accepted.
If he's fixed the bugs and gotten it to be portable (at least to POSIX), then why shouldn't it get adopted? Just look at those benchmark results! 259ms per loop instead of the next best of 1.25s. If a real app gets improvements from this, it should be a no-brainer.
I'd wait to see how this works with a real workload as opposed to his contrived example. It looks like it might be good, but it definitely needs to be better tested.
You have to start with one platform. You then make it work on the others.
If I write something that initially only runs on IRIX and then make it work on other OSs, it would be unfair to attribute it an all-the-world-is-IRIX. It just happens the guy had a Linux box to refine his idea to the point of working, unfortunately using stuff other OSs don't offer in the same way.
If it's easy, chances are many people will participate and the fork will take on a life of its own. If not, you will have to merge back the patch from time to time.
It's not a terrible thing, if the parts the patch changes don't get changed often. If they do, it could quickly turn into a nightmare
I program in Python (Django) full-time. It's my job. I'm the only developer at my company who knows C.
I'm sorry but mere mortals who just want to get stuff done are not going to maintain their own fork of an entire programming language. I don't know what alternative reality you've been spending your time in (academia? FSF employee?) but it's simply not going to occur unless someone else takes up the burden and makes regular public releases.
Notice that usage of CK patches by Linux users evaporated as soon as he went on software sabbatical.
Open source is not driven by crowd sourcing or collective effort, it's driven by a small number of heroes willing to devote time in order to benefit everyone else.
Open source is not driven by crowd sourcing or collective effort, it's driven by a small number of heroes willing to devote time in order to benefit everyone else.
I agree completely.
It is worth noting that this is true of mast crowd sourced projects though. A small cadre of devotees put in heroic effort and then a larger group contributes now and then, and everyone else either contributes nothing or some money.
Wow I was excited and confused for a second, I thought the impossible had been done! That's fine that it hasn't I am happy with Twisted Spread for multi-process RPC needs.
Also and perhaps more importantly this has not been incorporated into any version of python. It is just a patch on the bug tracker and realistically I doubt it has much chance of being accepted.