I argued that list comprehension's use cases are generally solved better with "real" lambdas + map (==> less to learn). To note that most every feature have some use case they are extra good for is not relevant.
But again -- why do you discuss subjects you obviously don't know? Ask instead.
I've heard this a few times now, and find it interesting. I guess people that compile their own do it without threading support, but I would guess the majority of Perl interpreters out there were bundled from some third party (usually the distro), and those almost always have threading enabled.
Also, that's a good thing. I've made quite heavy use of threads over the years and find Perl's abstraction of OS threads is actually quite nice to use, as long as you play to their strengths. I.e. pre-create your threads, and thread them like pthreads with easier IPC. If you want "green" threads, use any of the numerous packages that provide it.
Sure. When I just want "run this task in the background, I don't particularly care about throughput but don't block entirely". There's a niche where a proper task queue is too heavy and shared variables are a perfectly adequate communication mechanism.
> Don't get me started on list comprehension, extra stuff to learn because Python lack real maps with real lambdas.
They're a nicer abstraction for many purposes. Look at their Haskell origin, or Scala for/yield.