2 ms·
At this time I think there shouldn't be single threaded languages (I'm not sure which ones you're thinking about since it's mostly about libs and OS primitives)
by makapuf 9y ago
At this time I think there shouldn't be single threaded languages (I'm not sure which ones you're thinking about since it's mostly about libs and OS primitives). Even Python is multithreaded (even if the GIL makes it better to just use multiprocess), I'd say if you're after 10% improvements - the level those kind of CPU upgrades can offer on single thread, you'd better change languages if you're stuck to single thread. If your problem is difficult to parallelize, well that's another story.
- TorKlingberg 9y agoEven if the language supports threads, that doesn't mean your application magically parallel. No language will give you free parallelism. Besides, most software you run was written by somebody else.
- makapuf 9y agosure, that was my point about the problem being parallel or not. Of course the program make use of it and be multithreaded and cpu-bound or not. That was not the point. The OP talked about "developing in multi-threaded languages", which is 1) about new developments 2) about language being multithreaded or not. I believe we both say it shouldn't be a problem of language as in 2017.