Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Threads across programming languages
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 16:58:54 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <v119bu$4pfa$1@dont-email.me>
References: <GIL-20240429161553@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <v0ogum$1rc5n$1@dont-email.me> <v0ovvl$1ur12$4@dont-email.me>
 <v0p06i$1uq6q$5@dont-email.me>
 <v0shti$2vrco$2@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v0spsh$31ds4$3@dont-email.me>
 <v0stic$325kv$3@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v0svtn$32o8h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0t091$32qj6$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v0u90h$3c1r5$4@dont-email.me> <v0v7rf$3lu04$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0v8u3$3m7rm$1@dont-email.me> <v10t0v$20cs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v116q4$4at1$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 03 May 2024 01:58:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="96a83a72b940e46d81a2b3c04610ffbd";
	logging-data="157162"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18syzxAxSbIyBt77leqbm0ovndVhJxi9y4="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UNewRSpLBej1ihzllb3khvQrMIg=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v116q4$4at1$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2877

On 5/2/2024 4:15 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2024 13:28:15 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> 
>> On 5/1/2024 10:39 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 1 May 2024 22:20:47 -0700, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/1/2024 1:34 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Remember, we’re talking about maximizing I/O throughput here, so CPU
>>>>> is not the bottleneck.
>>>>
>>>> It can be if your thread synchronization scheme is sub par.
>>>
>>> Another reason to avoid threads.
>>
>> Why? Believe it or not, there are ways to create _highly_ scalable
>> thread synchronization schemes.
> 
> I’m sure there are. But none of that is relevant when the CPU isn’t the
> bottleneck anyway.

The CPU can become a bottleneck. Depends on how the programmer 
implements things.


>>> So long as your async tasks have an await call somewhere in their main
>>> loops, that should be sufficient to avoid most bottlenecks.
>>
>> async tasks are using threads... No?
> 
> No. They are built on coroutines. Specifically, the “stackless” variety.
> 
> <https://gitlab.com/ldo/python_topics_notebooks/-/blob/master/Generators%20&%20Coroutines.ipynb?ref_type=heads>

So, there is no way to take advantage of multiple threads on Python? 
Heck, even JavaScript has WebWorkers... ;^)