On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrenced...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 10:08:25 PM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> Ultimately, asyncio and multithreading might well merge. It will be >> difficult for a programmer to decide in the beginning of the design >> which way to go as the programming models are almost identical. > > The two will never merge, because asyncio is non-preemptive, while threading > is preemptive. Threading is for compute performance (and this is no good in > pure Python unless you write a C extension module), at the cost of much > trickier programming and greater propensity to bugs, while asyncio lets you > interleave background processing with waits for time-consuming external > activities (I/O, including network I/O, or just waiting for the user to click > a button or press a key), while keeping the race conditions manageable. > > So you see, they have very different application areas, that only > superficially overlap.
FWIW I think it's great that they have similar coding styles. We don't have a problem with threading and multiprocessing having very similar APIs, do we? Yet they exist to solve distinctly different problems. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
