Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is a delicate issue. As guido stated (https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-703-making-the-global-inter...):

> If there’s one lesson we’ve learned from the Python 2 to 3 transition, it’s that it would have been very beneficial if Python 2 and 3 code could coexist in the same Python interpreter. We blew it that time, and it set us back by about a decade.

So it's not so easy to decide to go with again 2 different versions of Python.

I understand how caution they are.

However, this commitment from Meta, complemented with MS financing Guido, and the quality of Sam Gross proposal makes me optimistic.



> PEP-703: Concurrent collection requires write barriers (or read barriers). The author is not aware of a way to add write barriers to CPython without substantially breaking the C-API.

Jesus. Imagine a language runtime being this hamstrung.


Well, CPython is 4 years older than Java. That's very old.

When it came out, this was in store:

https://img.redbull.com/images/w_3000/q_auto,f_auto/redbullc...

What was not in store were:

- multi-core CPU

- wide spread internet access

So people solve concurrency with a simple but efficient and sufficient method at the time: the GIL.

And nobody planned for the scientific and ML stack.


> However, this commitment from Meta,

One core dev for 3 years. Hardly earth-shattering, if compared to the billions poured into JavaScript.


> three engineer-years (from engineers experienced working in CPython internals) between the acceptance of PEP 703 and the end of 2025

This means multiple devs over a period of less than 3 years.


True, but it's way better than what we had before.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: