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."
"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.