Why not use MPI? It's cross platform, cross language and very widely supported already. And there're Python bindings already. On May 13, 2008, at 8:52 PM, Jesse Noller wrote: > I am looking for any questions, concerns or benchmarks python-dev has > regarding the possible inclusion of the pyprocessing module to the > standard library - preferably in the 2.6 timeline. In March, I began > working on the PEP for the inclusion of the pyprocessing (processing) > module into the python standard library[1]. The original email to the > stdlib-sig can be found here, it includes a basic overview of the > module: > > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/stdlib-sig/2008-March/000129.html > > The processing module mirrors/mimics the API of the threading module - > and with simple import/subclassing changes depending on the code, > allows you to leverage multi core machines via an underlying forking > mechanism. The module also supports the sharing of data across groups > of networked machines - a feature obviously not part of the core > threading module, but useful in a distributed environment. > > As I am trying to finish up the PEP, I want to see if I can address > any questions or include any other useful data (including benchmarks) > in the PEP prior to publishing it. I am also intending to include > basic benchmarks for both the processing module against the threading > module as a comparison. > > -Jesse > > [1] Processing page: http://pyprocessing.berlios.de/ > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/thomaspinckney3%40gmail.com
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