On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 2:31 PM Dan Stromberg <drsali...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 9:10 PM Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Concurrency is *hard*. There's no getting around it, there's no >> sugar-coating it. There are concepts that simply have to be learned, >> and the failures can be extremely hard to track down. Instantiating an >> object on the wrong thread can crash GTK, but maybe not immediately. >> Failing to sleep in one thread results in other threads stalling. I >> don't think any of this is changed by different modes (with the >> exception of process-based parallelism, which fixes a lot of >> concurrency at the cost of explicit IPC), and the more work >> programmers want their code to do, the more likely that they'll run >> into this. > > > I'd like to encourage folks not to give up on looking for new, simpler > parallelism/concurrency formalisms. > > They're out there - consider how well bash does with its parallelism in > pipelines.
That's process-based parallelism with unidirectional byte-stream IPC. It's incredibly specific, but also incredibly useful in its place :) Simpler parallelism techniques are always possible if you don't need much interaction between the processes. The challenge isn't making the simple cases work, but making the harder ones efficient. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/UPR7EIZTVKESA2ND4ISFXEYBZYLNSTCE/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
