Message386140
| Author | petr.viktorin |
|---|---|
| Recipients | petr.viktorin, shihai1991, vstinner |
| Date | 2021-02-02.13:12:53 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1612271573.38.0.235251337608.issue40601@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Sorry, I lost this bug in my TODO list :( > > I don't think it's necessary here. > > Did you read my rationale (first message)? Do you mean that per-interpreter GIL is not worth it? Right, I mean that it it is not worth breaking the C-API for all existing modules. Instead, I think that it can be done as an addition: only modules that don't use things like these static types would be allowed in subinterpreters that have their own GIL. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2021-02-02 13:12:53 | petr.viktorin | set | recipients: + petr.viktorin, vstinner, shihai1991 |
| 2021-02-02 13:12:53 | petr.viktorin | set | messageid: <1612271573.38.0.235251337608.issue40601@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2021-02-02 13:12:53 | petr.viktorin | link | issue40601 messages |
| 2021-02-02 13:12:53 | petr.viktorin | create | |