True but they would also be faster (probably more so) if Python had a jit compiler. Just seems that people want Python to be something other than it is. I guess the assumption is that it’s easier to remove the GIL or jit Python than the alternative, which would be to port whatever libraries to another ecosystem. Maybe a safe bet although there’s no deadline for GIL removal and that’s been a goal for decades.
>Just seems that people want Python to be something other than it is.
Well, if they didn't, we'd still be stuck with Python 1 or 0.1.
Why is the GIL suddenly where Python should keep "being what it is", and not any of those tons of changes, from 0.1 to 3.10?
Especially since the removal of the GIL doesn't change any spirit/essence of Python - just makes it faster.
Python wasn't conceived as "having a GIL" being some essential part of it, it was just a bad tradeoff for implementation convenience made back in the day where common multi-core machines were 20 years in the future...
That's not a noob question. That's a loaded question, from a perspective of knowing what people use Python for.
People use Python for all kinds of things, and a lot of them would be faster if they were able to take advantage of multithreading without the GIL.