John Nagle wrote: > sturlamolden wrote: >> On Feb 7, 2:53 am, "S.Mohideen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> This has been discussed to death before. Win32 threads and pthreads >> (which is what Python normally uses, depending on the platform) are >> designed to stay idle most of the time. They are therefore not a tool >> for utilizing the power of multiple CPUs, but rather make certain kind >> of programming tasks easier to program (i.e. non-blocking I/O, >> responsive UIs). > > Multithread compute-bound programs on multiple CPUs are > how you get heavy number-crunching work done on multiprocessors. > Of course, that's not something you use Python for, at least not > until it gets a real compiler. > > It's also the direction games are going. The XBox 360 forced > game developers to go that way, since it's a 3-CPU shared memory > multiprocessor. That translates directly to multicore desktops > and laptops. > > I went to a talk at Stanford last week by one of Intel's > CPU architects, and he said we're going have hundreds of > CPUs per chip reasonably soon. Python needs to get ready. >
Define "Python". Does "it" include you? What does it need to do to get ready. How do you plan to help? regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden Blog of Note: http://holdenweb.blogspot.com See you at PyCon? http://us.pycon.org/TX2007 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
