Phillip J. Eby wrote: > What the GIL-ranters don't get is that the GIL actually gives you just > enough determinism to be able to write threaded programs that don't crash, > and that maybe will even work if you treat every point of interaction > between threads as a minefield and program with appropriate care. So, if > threads are "easy" in Python compared to other langauges, it's *because of* > the GIL, not in spite of it.
Three cheers for the GIL! For the record, since I was quoted at the beginning of this subthread, *I* don't think threads are easy. But among all ways to handle concurrency, I just don't think they are so bad. And unlike many alternatives, they are relatively easy to get started with, and you can do a lot of work in a threaded system without knowing anything about threads. Of course, threads aren't the only way to accomplish that, just one of the easiest. -- Ian Bicking / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://blog.ianbicking.org _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
