Progress on No-GIL CPython

Re:Progress on No-GIL CPython by lisper on Sunday October 22, 2023 @06:27PM (#37979650)

Do you see where I wrote, "Sure, whatever." upstream? What do you think that means?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Progress on No-GIL CPython by colordrops on Wednesday October 25, 2023 @01:23AM (#38009427)

I saw the "indeed should not be", which seems to even more strongly indicate the opposite.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Progress on No-GIL CPython by lisper on Wednesday October 25, 2023 @07:12AM (#38011561)

You seem to have some serious reading comprehension issues. The context of that phrase was this sentence:

"The point is that breaking legacy code doesn't have to be a show-stopper for eliminating the GIL, and backwards-compatibility does not have to be (indeed should not be) an overriding consideration in a GIL-free Python."

That has nothing to do with opt-in vs opt-out.

[ Parent | on HN ]