Re: stackless implementation (was Re: Newstacklessproposal)

Christian Tismer wrote:

> Then, please read Timed CSP. It has more general insight,
> but needs more math. Do you come from math? :)

No, math is not my strong point.  I am an engineer, not a mathemageer.  I
will be lucky to make it through Hoare's math.

> I wish to make things simpler, and I fail miserably, most
> of the time. A new language is a new start of thinking.

You and I think alike.  I spend most of my thinking trying to makes things
simpler.  We can work together to make Prothon stackless implementation as
simple as possible.  Don't worry about my "thread-thinking".  I will not let
it get in the way of keeping tasklets simple.  You can hit me over the head
whenever you catch me making things complex.

>> The feedback in c.l.p. about Prothon has been getting more positive
>> lately. I think they are realizing that I am not out to ruin Python
>> and that Prothon is for real.  Instead of just saying "Prothon
>> sucks", they are saying they'd like to use Prothon if it had
>> libraries.
>
> Well, then let's think of a strategy which allows to (ab)use all
> of the Python linraries, which are partially great!

That would be great but I don't think that will be possible.  I will need to
make good porting tools so they can be stolen or rewritten one by one
easily.  We can improve them as we steal them.