On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 20:11:13 +0000 Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 10:11 -0800, Ali Çehreli wrote: > […] > > I use vibe.d as an example of how useful a tool D is. Recently, > > somebody has shown me a web server code written in Python: It was > > in 14 lines, could you belive it? Well, I've responded back with a > > vibe.d example. It was basically the same code as Python, > > translated to D. Of course, the solution that use vibe.d does not > > have Python's infamous GIL; instead, it comes with parallelism and > > concurrency out of the box. And you are aware of typos in your code > > even before running your program. ;) > > Python is not being compared to D here, vibe.d is being compared to > <what?> Flask, Bottle,… > The "aware of typos in your code even before running your program" is definitely a direct Python vs D thing. And it's a huge deal, IMO (And yea, I'm saying that after having [tried to] use Python/Bottle). > I would suggest that vibe.d can be a real competitor in the Flask, > Sinatra, Ratpack, etc. in the microframework space. But it needs the > word spreading, which means serious applications mentioned in Python, > Ruby, Groovy, and Go mailing lists. Issues about Python GIL are > irrelevant (even if true) as people just use process pools via > multiprocessing or concurrent.futures. It is important to not > obviously compare apples with wing nuts ;-) > While I agree that Vibe.d vs Flask/DJango/etc is the bigger comparison here, I think GIL is still relevant: With the Python-based stuff (as far as I'm aware), it's something that has to be actively worked around. When I tried to use Python/Bottle, I didn't even *know* how to do that ('Course, I'm not super-experienced with Python - and hope to never be - but still.) With D/Vibe.d, OTOH, GIL is simply a non-issue period.