Expected future for PEP 734?

[eric.snow]

@rtobar

I’m still a bit unclear about the expected future of the PEP.

Up until today, I was too. I had a productive discussion with the Steering Council a few hours ago. The path forward is substantially more clear now.

@rtobar

On the one hand the fact that’s been brewed within CPython seems encouraging, but OTOH the fact the PEP is deferred and the lack of further public discussion since the first half of the year doesn’t bid well.

I’m going to un-defer it soon. The lack of discussion is mostly because there wasn’t much left to discuss. In one of the last posts, the Steering Council set some expectations relative to trying a PyPI package first and we’ve been sorting out the logistics.

@rtobar

• I first tried the interpreters_pep_734 package directly, but quickly realised that it hasn’t been maintained: the README file mentions that most development is being done in upstream CPython, the last commit was many months ago, and the package doesn’t work correctly against 3.13.0rc*.

Yeah, sorry about that. I got stuck on some other work and was planning on getting back to it soon. I’m glad you found test.support.interpreters, but I don’t want people to have to resort to that.

@rtobar

• Is PEP 734 expected to be eventually implemented? If so, what’s the --very rough-- plan?

The plan is to have a PyPI package for 3.13+ (and maybe 3.12) that’s hosted on a cpython PyPI org. We’ll assess where things stand early next year with the goal of deciding about inclusion in 3.14. I’m hopeful, and am planning accordingly, but it isn’t guaranteed.

In the meantime, I’m planning on getting interpreters_pep_734 working soon. Again, apologies for the lapse.

@rtobar

• If not in the stdlib, would it be offered as an external package? In the discussions I saw how there were people both in favour and against having it in the stdlib, hopefully the former will prevail.

The goal is to have it in the stdlib for 3.14. Either way, I’m going to make sure interpreters_pep_734 on PyPI works in the near term and we’ll likely have a separate package there soon under the future cpython PyPI org.

@rtobar

• Why are channels present in the test.support.interpreters.channels and _interpchannels if PEP 734 doesn’t consider them?

They aren’t in the PEP because I wanted to start as minimal as possible and queues are a simpler, existing Python data structure. I hope to add channels to the stdlib package eventually (assuming the PEP is accepted). Regardless, channels will be available through the PyPI package.