[Python-ideas] Python 3000 TIOBE -3%
mwm at mired.org
Thu Feb 9 19:42:37 CET 2012
On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:35:17 +0800
Matt Joiner <anacrolix at gmail.com> wrote:
> the GIL being the gorilla here, multiprocessing is unacceptable as
> long as native threading is the only supported concurrency mechanism
If threading is the only acceptable concurrency mechanism, then Python
is the wrong language to use. But you're also not building scaleable
systems, which is most of where it really matters. If you're willing
to consider things other than threading - and you have to if you want
to build scaleable systems - then Python makes a good choice.
Personally, I'd like to see a modern threading model in Python,
especially if it's tools can be extended to work with other
concurrency mechanisms. But that's a *long* way into the future.
As for "popular vs. good" - "good" is subjective measure. So the two
statements "anything popular is good" and "nothing popular was ever
good unless it had no competition" can both be true.
Personally, I lean toward the latter. I tend to find things that are
popular to not be very good, which makes me distrust the taste of the
populace. The python core developers, on the other hand, have an
excellent record when it comes to keeping the language good - and the
failures tend to be concessions to popularity! So I'd rather the
current system for adding features stay in place and *not* see the
language add features just to gain popularity. We already have Perl if
you want that kind of language.
That said, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest changes you think will
improve the popularity of the language. But be prepared to show that
they're actually good, as opposed to merely possibly popular.
Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> http://www.mired.org/
Independent Software developer/SCM consultant, email for more information.
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
More information about the Python-ideas