On Friday, April 11, 2014 1:14:01 AM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
>
> Seriously, Erlang (and Go) have nice tools for managing state machines
> and concurrency. However, Python (and C) are perfectly suitable for
> clear asynchronous programming idioms. I'm happy that asyncio is
> happening after all these long years. It would be nice if it supported
> edge-triggered wakeups, but I suppose that isn't supported in all
> operating systems.
>
Yes... Let me restate what (I hear you as) saying
Lets start with pure uniprocessor machines for ease of discussion (also of
history)
An OS, sits between the uni-hardware and provides
multi{processing,users,threads,etc}.
How does it do it? By the mechanisms process-switching, interleaving etc
In short all the good-stuff... that constitutes asyncio (and relations)
What you are saying is that what the OS is doing, you can do better.
Analogous to said C programmer saying that what (data structures) the python
programmer can make he can do better.
Note I dont exactly agree with Sturla either.
To see that time-shift the C/Python argument 30 years back when it was
imperative
languages vs poorly implemented, buggy, interpreted Lisp/Prolog.
In that world, your 'I'd rather do it by hand/work out my state machine'
would make considerable sense.
Analogously, if the only choice were mainstream (concurrency-wise) languages --
C/C++/Java/Python -- + native threads + overheads + ensuing errors/headaches,
then
the: "Please let me work out my state machine and manage my affairs" would be
sound.
But its not the only choice!!
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Euler#Personal_philosophy_and_religious_beliefs
>
> n
> a + b
> Sir, ------ = x, hence God exists--reply!
> n
I always thought that God exists because was e^(ipi) + 1 = 0 :D
Evidently (s)he has better reasons for existing!
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
