Ivan Voras wrote: > Tuvas wrote: >>waits for a lul in the computing process. How can I ensure that this >>does not happen? This thread uses little processing power, so it could >>be set to a high priority, if there is a way to do this. Thanks! > > Python is bad for concurrently executing/computing threads, but it > shouldn't be that bad - do you have lots of compute-intensive threads?
Just in case anyone coming along in the future reads this statement, for the record I'd like to say this is obviously a matter of opinion or interpretation, since in my view Python is *excellent* for threads (which are generally considered "concurrently executing", so I think that adjective is redundant, too). Ivan, what makes you say that Python is bad for threads? Did the qualifcation "concurrently executing/computing" have some significance that I missed? -Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
