> there is also discussion at the moment of thread-synchronisation on > the stackless python list. people were considering ideas related to > futures and csp (influenced largely by the oz language, i think). If someone could summarize those ideas here, that would be great (I have no time to read the oz reference manual, alas). > maybe stackless, with its stronger emphasis on threads, is the place > to iron out a really good solution to multi-threading before making > changes to standard python? Um, Stackless has a very different notion of threads than core Python. Stackless threads are non-pre-emptive and cannot be used for overlapping I/O, I believe (at least not easily). > personal opinion: while java may be better than python in this respect > i think there are much better solutions out there. i'm a java > programmer and in my last project, which was multi-threaded, most bugs > came from threading issues. In any project that is multi-threaded, most bugs will come from threading issues. This is regardless of programming language -- it's a deep, as yet ununderstood property of threads. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4