On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Stephen R. van den Berg <s...@cuci.nl> wrote: > Danesh Daroui wrote: >>Thanks for the info. I thought Pike would run all threads simultaneously >>when number of threads does not exceed number of available processors and >>otherwise using time sharing like other languages. > > Well, most popular interpreter-based languages have the same problem as Pike: > they do not use more than one CPU core per process (e.g. Perl, Python, Ruby, > Javascript).
It's also worth noting that there are several Python interpreters, of which not all use a Global Interpreter Lock; CPython (the most popular one and the one most people think of as "python") does, and there've been periodic calls to rewrite things to not need it. So far, the impetus to remove such a lock has been relatively weak; the advantages of the GIL (simplicity and performance) majorly outweigh the advantages of no-GIL (ability to use multiple cores simultaneously) for most applications. ChrisA
