Guido van Rossum

And so that would be an interesting possibility if we would be willing as Python core developers to actually maintain that code indefinitely.

And if we're willing to put up with the additional complexity of the interpreter and the additional sort of overhead for the single threaded case.

And I'm personally not convinced that there are enough people needing the speed of multiple threads with their Python programs.

that it's worth to sort of take that performance hit and that complexity hit.

And I feel that the GIL actually is a pretty nice Goldilocks point between no threads and all threads all the time.

But not everybody agrees on that.

So that is definitely a possible future.

The sub-interpreters look like a fairly safe bet for 3.12.

So say a year from now.

Yeah, well, we're,

As a community and as a core development team, we have a large amount of painful memories about the Python 3 transition, which is one reason that sort of

Everybody is happy that we've decided there's not going to be a 4.0, at least not anytime soon.

And if there is going to be one, we'll sort of plan the transition very differently.

Because clearly we underestimated the pain the transition caused for our users in the Python 3 case.

And...

had we known we could have sort of designed Python 3 somewhat differently without making it any worse.

We just thought that we had a good plan, but we underestimated what sort of the users were capable of when it comes to that kind of transition.

Everyone on the core team had basically moved on years before.

It was a little symbolic moment to signal to the remaining users that

there was no longer going to be any new releases or support for Python 2.7.