On 15/02/16 13:09, CMG Thrissur wrote: > I just wanted an opinion on the subject, asyncio and threading both seam > to do the same job, but i feel threading is better because of the > multiple ways i can control it.
They do similar jobs but asyncio uses threading in the background and I believe it's at OS level not Python native threading (which has some significant issues). However, the biggest differences are in the conceptual usage. asyncio is intended primarily for event driven scenarios where something happens that triggers a long running (eg. a hundred milliseconds or longer, say). You add the task to the event loop and it gets processes as and when it gets scheduled. You don't care and just wait for it to complete after which it will call your callback function. So if you have a scenario where tasks can be scheduled and forgotten about then asyncio is ideal. The obvious use case is a server receiving messages over a network and returning results when done. If you want to do something in near real-time with a separate thread where you comunicate between two (or more) threads then asyncio is not such a good fit and conventional threading will likely be better. But it's a lot harder to get right. With asyncio all the hard threading bits are done for you. Finally, if you have done any work with NodeJS using Javascript you are likely to find asyncio a natural fit to your style. HTH -- Alan G Author of the Learn to Program web site http://www.alan-g.me.uk/ http://www.amazon.com/author/alan_gauld Follow my photo-blog on Flickr at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/alangauldphotos _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
