threading
Rustom Mody
rustompmody at gmail.com
Tue Apr 8 22:17:21 EDT 2014
On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 4:02:10 AM UTC+5:30, Sturla Molden wrote:
> On 08/04/14 22:30, Grant Edwards wrote:
> >>> Unix maybe, but what about Windows? Is it efficient to create
> >>> processes under Windows?
> >> Processes are very heavy-weight on Windows.
> > Not surprising given its VMS heritage. I remember running shell
> > scripts under VMS on a VAX-11/780 that took hours to do what would
> > have taken minutes on an LSI-11 running Unix. The whole Unix "small
> > tools working together" paradigm is based on the assumption that
> > process creation and death are fast and cheap.
> That is one reason software tend to be monolithic on Windows, including
> build tools.
> Running a configure script used to take forever, but thankfully
> computers are getting faster.
I was looking at Erlang...
And under similar presumptions that I see on this thread (in a different sense!)
viz.: Either the messiness of callback hell or the error-proneness of threads
However this was Erlang whose basic premise is to question this either-or.
And so I was properly told-off by Joe Armstrong
(roughly the equivalent of being told off by Guido out here :-) )
http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2012-October/069560.html
Note Erlang, Go and Cloud-haskell all set out along a similar route:
http://joneisen.tumblr.com/post/38188396218/concurrency-models-go-vs-erlang
More information about the Python-list
mailing list