[amethyst]

> Python makes it incredibly tough.

I disagree, Python makes it incredibly easy to work with threads in many different ways. It just doesn't make threads faster.

[bmitc]

In what way? Threading, asyncio, tasks, event loops, multiprocessing, etc. are all complicated and interact poorly if at all. In other languages, these are effectively the same thing, lighter weight, and actually use multicore.

If I launch 50 threads with run away while loops in Python, it takes minutes to laumch and barely works after. I can run hundreds of thousands and even millions of runaway processes in Elixir/Erlang that launch very fast and processes keep chugging along just fine.

[bb88]

> If I launch 50 threads with run away while loops in Python, it takes minutes to laumch and barely works after. I can run hundreds of thousands and even millions of runaway processes in Elixir/Erlang that launch very fast and processes keep chugging along just fine.

I'm not sure that argument helps your position on threading. I once saw a java program spin off 3000 threads doing god knows what. Debugging the fucking thing was impossible.

[rmbyrro]

The whole purpose of threads is to improve overall speed of execution. Unless you're working with a very small number of threads (single digits), that's a very hard to achieve goal in Python. I wouldn't count this as easy to use. It's easy to program, yes, but not easy to get working with reasonably acceptable performance.

[bb88]

And the python people would just point to multiprocessing...which works pretty well.