On Nov 3, 2012, at 9:36 PM, Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [byte] > >> >> Bill, I appreciate your comment and have given it much thought, Ramit made >> one much the same the other day. Here lies the potential problem, though it >> might not be one at all, I need to do some experimenting. While I am a fan >> of monolithic programming, I'm wondering if what I'm trying to do would work >> on, say an old netbook. That might be a requirement. I'd prefer it not to >> be, but it might. Also, thanks for reminding my addled old brain that event >> driven is called interrupts. I knew that at one point, but seem to have >> flushed it somehow. > > Who's Bill? Alan was referring to Twisted that is an event driven > framework. Event driven or asynchronous processing is a third option > (after threads or processes). The Twisted library is also capable of > launching threads and (I think) processes for you so it could > accommodate for all of the possibilities you want in one framework. > This Bill, and with apologies, - after some debate with myself I sent my comment to Richard without copying the list, since it was not relevant to either Threading or Multiprocessing - I simply pointed out that modern processors are so fast that he can probably accomplish what he wants to do by breaking his main subtasks into semi-atomic chunks and calling them round-robin. It would require keeping careful track of some shared globals, but might be a MUCH simpler initial approach. Those sub tasks could be coalesced and converted to multiprocessing later after he gets going with the robot. -Bill _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
