3 ms·
> What most people don't realize is that for concurrency to be useful, there must be parallelism. No, as far as I understand from this and other talks, Rob Pik
by mseepgood 14y ago
> What most people don't realize is that for concurrency to be useful, there must be parallelism.
No, as far as I understand from this and other talks, Rob Pike argues that concurrency is useful even without parallelism: it's a better way to structure software. A nice example for this is shown in his talk about lexical scanning in Go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxaD_trXwRE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxaD_trXwRE
- jules 14y agoI'd say concurrency is a bit overkill for that problem (i.e. threads or processes scheduled by the run time system that appears non-deterministic to the programmer). Deterministic coroutines work fine. Even Python generators are sufficient. Though perhaps "useful" is a bit too broad: maybe it should be replaced by: > What most people don't realize is that for concurrency to improve performance, there must be parallelism.