JIT in CPython has nothing to do with PyPy or GraalPy: it's its own thing. If they can't get a PEP accepted within 6 months then it's best that the code isn't weighing on the main codebase until an approach can be agreed, at which point work integrating it into main can restart. It's not an all-or-nothing situation.
Except it’s not. The intention of JIT in CPython is to make it into the main branch feature complete. If they can’t get the necessary support then it won’t be relegated to niche uses, it’ll be abandoned and need a new effort to get off the ground.
I don’t know why you keep bringing up Python being dynamic, it’s not particularly relevant. What matters is the content of the request which is to outline how the feature should work and be maintained over time before it can be accepted.
What’s your position? That we should allow an extremely complex system into Python with:
- No clear design goal?
- No maintenance plan?
- No discussion with the steering committee?
PyPy and Jython, and others are not built by the Python team and there has never been a suggestion that any of these systems would be part of CPython.
So again, I still don’t see how different implementations of Python are relevant to the discussion about CPython.
