[Stackless] Problems with removing tasklet.

[Jeff Senn]

Gustavo Niemeyer <niemeyer at conectiva.com> writes:
> Just so that you can feel a little bit confortable when detailing
> problems, I've already ported the Stackless assembly code to a few
> architectures, so I'm able to understand issues more deeply.

Ok -- so you probably understand about as much as I do.  My cautions
were for most people who inevitably write asynchronous code that
deadlocks and then blame it on the implementation. :-)! (big grin)

> I'd like to get into those details. What's the real problem with letting
> extensions call back the interpreter. Ok, because it could switch
> context when that happens. The only case I could think so far is when
> a variable allocated in the stack was returned, and while it was still
> used, the context was switched. Is there anything else that we know
> about right now?

And "destroying" tasklets without letting them "run out".

> Exceptions are passed to the parent, aren't they? Is that the problem
> you mention above?

Yes (and combine with previous problem).

> Btw, is there any reason why you'd like to see the old
> implementation of stackless reimplemented in the future?
> If so, would you think about this (perhaps as a side
> project) if there was enough support from the community?

I do like the previous version because it relies on few features of
the underlying platform, is pure C, and has hard (and very small)
bounds on how much stack it uses -- thus it makes it very easy to
build a light "Python Operating System" for an embedded platform...

-- 
-Jas   --------------------     www.maya.com
       Jeff Senn          |   / / |-/ \ / /|®
       Chief Technologist |  /|/| |/ o | /-|
       Head of R&D        | Taming Complexity®

_______________________________________________
Stackless mailing list
Stackless at www.tismer.com
http://www.tismer.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless