Don't Bet on Moore Saving Your Ass

Re:Don't Bet on Moore Saving Your Ass by d0mine on Thursday January 08, 2009 @05:04AM (#424702)

multiprocessing module supports multiple "concurrent" programming paradigms.

It greatly depends on the task but my usage of the module is in disagreement with the PEP i.e., I don't use its threading-like API preferring its "distributed" capabilities.

The main point is there are multiple "concurrent" approaches and Java-like "threading" approach is the worst for many tasks i.e., It would be nice if GIL had been gone but for many "concurrent" approaches It doesn't matter. http://wiki.python.org/moin/ParallelProcessing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don't Bet on Moore Saving Your Ass by d0mine on Friday January 09, 2009 @05:42PM (#427242)

The endless GIL debate: why not remove thread support instead? http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-December/08...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don't Bet on Moore Saving Your Ass by timf on Thursday January 08, 2009 @10:49AM (#425030)

I'm in agreement (note that I could not really tell what you were saying in your original comment).

If I need to do some tightly coupled thing with threads and shared data etc. I'm not going to be looking at Python anyhow.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don't Bet on Moore Saving Your Ass by rbanffy on Thursday January 08, 2009 @08:39AM (#424864)

I would love to have parallel list comprehensions, for instance.

[ Parent | on HN ]