Home Original page

Time to rename Stackless? (Re: Stackless Platform Independence?)

Christian Tismer tismer at tismer.com
Mon Feb 25 05:42:39 EST 2002 
Greg Ewing wrote:

> Seems to me that "Stackless" is a misnomer now. If it
> works by switching between multiple stacks, then it now
> uses *more* stacks than normal Python!


:-)

Well, it doesn't switch between multiple stacks, it
repeatedly replaces parts of the same stack.
(But this would have the same effect, of course).
It is still stackless in the sense that order of
execution is not restricted by the C stack.
It is the same effect as in the old design, just
a simpler approach:

Instead of begging the interpreter not to recurse,
I now enforce it. Stackless Python always had
and still has a C stack. Today it is totally
freed form the C stack's limitations, so it is
more stackless than ever before.

> Maybe something like "Microthreaded Python" or
> "Multitasking Python" would be better?


We have now tasklets, proclets, and the stack slices
are stacklets. :)

Stacklets Python - ciao - chris

-- 
Christian Tismer             :^)   <mailto:tismer at tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware  :     Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Kaunstr. 26                  :    *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14163 Berlin                 :     PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
PGP Fingerprint       E182 71C7 1A9D 66E9 9D15  D3CC D4D7 93E2 1FAE F6DF
      where do you want to jump today?   http://www.stackless.com/
More information about the Python-list mailing list