Opposite of yield?
cliechti at gmx.net
Wed Sep 10 23:53:17 CEST 2003
achrist at easystreet.com wrote in news:3F5F95B9.A8CB5786 at easystreet.com:
> Peter Hansen wrote:
>> Queue.Queue.get() ...
> That looks good. But that needs a thread to block, right?
> A generator manages to run without being a thread (at least
> overtly). If we have the suck() statement, we also need
> something that's the opposite of a generator (a Sucker?)
> and something that's the opposite of an iterator (a Suckee?).
> I'm starting to get an idea why this is completely not all
basicaly you poll every generator (or more precicly "iterable" as that is
what a generator returns), one after the other... enjoy the link below.
> The main question this raises is "How lightweight are threads?"
> Can I program with dozens or hundreds of python threads in a
> program (for example under Windows) and not notice that this is
> an inefficient or inept coding style?
this one is for you :-)
you wont get happy with hundrets of native threads, but with the light ones
from above you can have thousands...
generaly you will find interesting stuff here (one line):
Chris <cliechti at gmx.net>
More information about the Python-list