On 2008-09-17, Arnar Birgisson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Manlio and others, > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 14:58, Manlio Perillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/Shuttleworth-Python-needs-to-focus-on-future--/news/111534 >>> >>> "cloud computing, transactional memory and future multicore processors" >>> >> >> Multicore support is already "supported" in Python, if you use >> multiprocessing, instead of multithreading. > > Well, I'm a huge Python fan myself, but multiprocessing is not really > a solution as much as it is a workaround. Python as a language has no > problem with multithreading and multicore support and has all > primitives to do conventional shared-state parallelism. However, the > most popular /implementation/ of Python sacrifies this for > performance, it has nothing to do with the language itself.
Huh. I see multi-threading as a workaround for expensive processes, which can explicitly use shared memory when that makes sense. -- Aaron Denney -><- _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
