On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:46:59PM +0000, Nick Maclaren wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I think this discussion would be facilitated by teasing the first
> > bullet-point from the latter two: the first deals with async IO, while
> > the latter two deal with cooperative multitasking.
> >
> > It's easy to write a single package that does both, but it's much harder
> > to write *two* fairly generic packages with a clean API between them,
> > given the varied platform support for async IO and the varied syntax and
> > structures (continuations vs. microthreads, in my terminology) for
> > multitasking. Yet I think that division is exactly what's needed.
>
> The 'threading' approach to asynchronous I/O was found to be a BAD
> IDEA back in the 1970s, was abandoned in favour of separating
> asynchronous I/O from threading, and God alone knows why it was
> reinvented - except that most of the people with prior experience
> had died or retired :-(
<snip>
Knowing the history of something like this is very helpful, but I'm not
sure what you mean by this first paragraph. I think I'm most unclear
about the meaning of "The 'threading' approach to asynchronous I/O"?
Its opposite ("separating asynchronous I/O from threading") doesn't
illuminate it much more. Could you elaborate?
Dustin
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
