4 ms·

I think this is an interesting take, and it think people should think about their use of Python in general. I personally think that pythons support for the mas

I think this is an interesting take, and it think people should think about their use of Python in general. I personally think that pythons support for the massively parallel hardware we have is lacking, and the devs are being too slow and disparate to respond, combine that with what is basically subpar tooling around threads and you have people reaching for multiprocessing out of necessity. Off the back of this, should Python just maybe give up on threads entirely? Should it relegate itself to simple-scripting and open the floor to something that can do these things? I’ve personally stopped writing Python for these reasons- apart from “AI stuff” which isn’t something I dabble in anymore, there’s nothing that Python can do anymore that another language can’t do better, just as (if not more) easily, without giving anything up.

Daishiman 3y ago
99% of programmers have no real need for massively parallel code or prioritizing paralellism over sheer ease of use and easy access to C libraries. People think parallelism is a huge use case. Despite the fact that a ton of CPU cycles are spent on multicore-compatible code, in practice that's just not what the vast majority of programmers spend their days working on.
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Your comments contain strongly opinionated assertions without proof. Everything that is a server is profiting massively off of true parallelism. Stuff written in Elixir, Golang and Rust scales much better than the same thing written in Python or Ruby. Me and many other colleagues have seen the before and after in our monitoring systems. Maybe you should instead qualify your comments with "I have carefully and deliberately stayed away from the need to do parallel programming throughout my entire career" and I feel that way your comments would have the necessary context. Otherwise you are misleading less experienced people.

Daishiman 3y ago

99% of programmers have no real need for massively parallel code or prioritizing paralellism over sheer ease of use and easy access to C libraries. People think parallelism is a huge use case. Despite the fact that a ton of CPU cycles are spent on multicore-compatible code, in practice that's just not what the vast majority of programmers spend their days working on.

pdimitar 3y ago
Your comments contain strongly opinionated assertions without proof. Everything that is a server is profiting massively off of true parallelism. Stuff written in Elixir, Golang and Rust scales much better than the same thing written in Python or Ruby. Me and many other colleagues have seen the before and after in our monitoring systems. Maybe you should instead qualify your comments with "I have carefully and deliberately stayed away from the need to do parallel programming throughout my entire career" and I feel that way your comments would have the necessary context. Otherwise you are misleading less experienced people.