multiprocessing module supports multiple "concurrent" programming paradigms. It ... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		d0mine on Jan 8, 2009 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Don't Bet on Moore Saving Your Ass 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

d0mine on Jan 9, 2009 | [–]

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

timf on Jan 8, 2009 | | [–]

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.

rbanffy on Jan 8, 2009 | [–]

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

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact