On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> wrote: > In article <mailman.8970.1396843004.18130.python-l...@python.org>, > Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> wrote: >> > There is (or at least, was) another reason. Creating a new process used >> > to be far more expensive than creating a new thread. In modern Unix >> > kernels, however, the cost difference has become much less, so this is >> > no longer a major issue. >> >> Unix maybe, but what about Windows? Is it efficient to create >> processes under Windows? > > Whether something works well on Windows is really not something I worry > about a lot.
It's a concern for some of us. Maybe one day supporting Windows will be like supporting Python 2.4 is now - something that only a few people do, and knowingly pay the complexity price for it - but for now, it's a fully-supported platform for a lot of Python software, so in a generic discussion, I'd say it's important to note it. Threading has NOT been entirely replaced with multiprocessing. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
