On 14/03/2014 00:36, Tim Chase wrote:
On 2014-03-14 00:25, Chris Withers wrote:
I've been pleasantly surprised by the succinct, well reasoned and
respectful replies from each of the communities!
As one who doesn't lurk on the other lists, is there a nice executive
summary of their responses?
On 11/03/2014 19:41, Terry Reedy wrote:
I suspect I'll just end up cross-posting to the various mailing lists,
Bad idea. Post separately if you must.
which I hope won't cause too much offence or kick off any flame wars.
It would do both.
Ye of little faith :-P
I've been pleasantly
On 2014-03-14 00:25, Chris Withers wrote:
I've been pleasantly surprised by the succinct, well reasoned and
respectful replies from each of the communities!
As one who doesn't lurk on the other lists, is there a nice executive
summary of their responses?
-tkc
--
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Marko Rauhamaa ma...@pacujo.net wrote:
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com:
What corner cases are there with threads that you don't have with
anything else?
There are numerous. Here's one
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2014-03-11, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Sturla Molden sturla.molden at gmail.com writes:
Chris Withers chris at simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
On 10/03/2014 21:57, Terry Reedy wrote:
I'd like to be able to serve the rest of the web api using a pyramid
wsgi app if possible, and I'd like to be able to write the things that
process requests in and validation out in a synchronous fashion, most
likely spinning off a thread for each one.
Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
- tornado
- twisted
Looking at Tornado's examples on the web I find this:
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance().start()
Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
- tornado
- twisted
I'd go for using iocp, epoll and kqueue/kevent directly. Why bother to
learn a framework? You will
Sturla Molden sturla.mol...@gmail.com:
Looking at Tornado's examples on the web I find this:
[...]
(1) This was written by some Java guys.
I have written several Python async frameworks starting from
select.epoll(). It's only a handful of lines of code (plus an AVL tree
implementation for
Sturla Molden sturla.mol...@gmail.com:
I'd go for using iocp, epoll and kqueue/kevent directly. Why bother to
learn a framework? You will find epoll and kqueue/kevent in the select
module and iocp in pywin32.
You beat me to it.
However, I'm hoping asyncio will steer the Python faithful away
Marko Rauhamaa ma...@pacujo.net wrote:
Now, I've taken a brief look at the new asyncio and it looks as if it
has everything one would hope for (and then some). You'd still need to
supply the protocol implementations yourself.
Tulip (the new async module) is nice. But I am a bit confused as to
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Marko Rauhamaa ma...@pacujo.net wrote:
Sturla Molden sturla.mol...@gmail.com:
I'd go for using iocp, epoll and kqueue/kevent directly. Why bother to
learn a framework? You will find epoll and kqueue/kevent in the select
module and iocp in pywin32.
You beat
Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com:
eventlet has 115k downloads from PyPI over the last month. gevent has
143k. Twisted has 147k. Tornado has 173k.
I'd say that a lot of Python users are already doing non-blocking
network I/O, in one form or another.
There aren't so many network developers in
On 11 March 2014 11:54, Marko Rauhamaa ma...@pacujo.net wrote:
Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com:
eventlet has 115k downloads from PyPI over the last month. gevent has
143k. Twisted has 147k. Tornado has 173k.
I'd say that a lot of Python users are already doing non-blocking
network I/O, in
Chris Withers chris at simplistix.co.uk writes:
The protocols are all financial (do we really not have a pure-python FIX
library?!) but none are likely to have existing python implementations.
If you are mostly writing protocol implementations (aka parsers and
serializers), then you should
Sturla Molden sturla.molden at gmail.com writes:
Chris Withers chris at simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
- tornado
- twisted
I'd go for using iocp, epoll and
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Sturla Molden sturla.mol...@gmail.comwrote:
Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
- tornado
- twisted
Looking at
On 2014-03-11, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Sturla Molden sturla.molden at gmail.com writes:
Chris Withers chris at simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
-
Hi Grant
On Tuesday, 11 March 2014 16:52:18 UTC, Grant Edwards wrote:
[...]
And don't bother with device drivers for the network adapters either.
Just map their PCI regions in to user-space and twiddle the reigisters
directly! ;)
[I do that when testing PCI boards with C code, and one
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 3:01 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Yes, why use a library when you can rewrite it all yourself?
Actually, you should probably issue system calls to the kernel directly,
the libc is overrated (as is portability, I suppose).
It's a trade-off, of course. I
Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Yes, why use a library when you can rewrite it all yourself?
This assumes something equivalent to the library will have to be written.
But if it can be replaced with something very minimalistic it is just
bloat. I would also like to respond that the
Sturla Molden sturla.molden at gmail.com writes:
Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net wrote:
Yes, why use a library when you can rewrite it all yourself?
This assumes something equivalent to the library will have to be written.
But if it can be replaced with something very minimalistic
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
This is the usual assumption that high-level libraries are made of useless
cruft piled up by careless programmers. But there are actual reasons
why these frameworks have a significant amount of code, and people who
On 3/11/2014 3:53 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
On 10/03/2014 21:57, Terry Reedy wrote:
I'd like to be able to serve the rest of the web api using a pyramid
wsgi app if possible, and I'd like to be able to write the things that
process requests in and validation out in a synchronous fashion, most
Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
This is the usual assumption that high-level libraries are made of useless
cruft piled up by careless programmers.
It often is the case, particularly in network programming.
But in this case the programmer is Guido, so it doesn't apply. :)
What
Sturla Molden wrote:
Another thing is that co-routines and yield from statements just makes it
hard to follow the logic of the program. I still have to convince myself
that a library for transforming epoll function calls into co-routines is
actually useful.
It's not epoll function calls that
Gregory Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz:
It's not epoll function calls that the coroutine style is intended
to replace, it's complex systems of chained callbacks. They're
supposed to make that kind of logic *easier* to follow. If you haven't
had that experience, it may be because you've
Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net:
This is the usual assumption that high-level libraries are made of
useless cruft piled up by careless programmers. But there are actual
reasons why these frameworks have a significant amount of code, and
people who decide to ignore those reasons are simply
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Marko Rauhamaa ma...@pacujo.net wrote:
If you can't write your own event loop, you probably can't be trusted
with any multithreaded code, which has much more baffling corner cases.
I'm not sure about that. Threads are generally easier to handle,
because each one
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com:
Yep. Now how is that not a problem when you use some other model, like
an event loop? The standard methods of avoiding deadlocks (like
acquiring locks in strict order) work exactly the same for all models,
and are just as necessary.
I was simply saying that
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Marko Rauhamaa ma...@pacujo.net wrote:
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com:
What corner cases are there with threads that you don't have with
anything else?
There are numerous. Here's one example: deadlocks due to two threads
taking locks in a different order.
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com:
What corner cases are there with threads that you don't have with
anything else?
There are numerous. Here's one example: deadlocks due to two threads
taking locks in a different order. The problem crops up naturally with
two intercommunicating classes. It can
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
- tornado
- twisted
From my side, I'm looking to experimentally build a network testing
tool that will need to speak a fair few network protocols, both classic
tcp and
On 3/10/2014 4:38 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
Hi All,
I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
and pick one to use from:
- asyncio/tulip
- tornado
- twisted
From my side, I'm looking to experimentally build a network testing
tool that will need to speak a fair few
34 matches
Mail list logo
