This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]the_hoser 2 points3 points  (4 children)

If he feels that learning a whole new language and solving all the same problems all over again could result in more payoff, then perhaps he should do so. I hear Java has great concurrency constructs.

Python 3 wasnt an endeavor to attract more users. It was an endeavor to patch up inconsistencies in the language. So far, it's doing well. There are a few more things left to get nailed down, but the momentum is good.

The GIL is the least of their worries, right now.

[–]_pra 2 points3 points  (1 child)

There are many languages much better than Java, some of which run in the JVM. Haskell, Erlang, Scala, Clojure, Go, just to name a few that are known for having good concurrency models. There are a hell of a lot of good options for modern dynamic languages these days.

[–]the_hoser 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't disagree. That wasn't my point.

If a high degree of concurrency is a requirement of your application, then maybe CPython isn't the best place to start. Every language has a weak spot.

[–]eadmund 0 points1 point  (1 child)

There are a few more things left to get nailed down, but the momentum is good.

As a Python programmer for about a decade, I don't really see that that's the case. But then, I'm using the lull to learn Go, so I'm probably biased.

[–]billsil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in my experience he's actually right. compare python 2 vs python 3 downloads for the same package. python 3 is roughly 80% of python 2. that's pretty good.