The Future of Python Threading

Ben Finney bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Fri Aug 10 16:38:39 CEST 2007


"Justin T." <jmtulloss at gmail.com> writes:

> The truth is that the future (and present reality) of almost every
> form of computing is multi-core, and there currently is no effective
> way of dealing with concurrency.

Your post seems to take threading as the *only* way to write code for
multi-core systems, which certainly isn't so.

Last I checked, multiple processes can run concurrently on multi-core
systems. That's a well-established way of structuring a program.

> We still worry about setting up threads, synchronization of message
> queues, synchronization of shared memory regions, dealing with
> asynchronous behaviors, and most importantly, how threaded an
> application should be.

All of which is avoided by designing the program to operate as
discrete processes communicating via well-defined IPC mechanisms.

-- 
 \      "I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without |
  `\   hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd |
_o__)                                never expect it."  -- Jack Handey |
Ben Finney



More information about the Python-list mailing list