Why not easy Thread synchronization?

[Changjune Kim]

"Alex Martelli" <aleax at aleax.it> wrote in message
news:scowa.168135$K35.3951571 at news2.tin.it...
> Iwan van der Kleyn wrote:
>
> > It's very easy writing simple  threaded programs in Python. In fact,
its
> > part of my "evangelize demo's" :-)
> > However, thread synchroni(s/z)ation seems to be a bit more fussy and
> > complex then,  for example, Java.
> >
> > Why not a "synchronization" reserved word like in Java which takes care
> > of "scary" bits under the hood?
> >
> > For example:
> >
> > sync def log(s):  #in which the hypothetical keyword 'sync' makes the
> > function 'log' thread safe
> > sys.stout.write(s)
> > sys.stout.flush()
> >
> > Seems to be a bit more fitting to Python mucking about with locks and
> > mutexes.
>
> The most productive pythonic approach is generally to use Queue instances
> for all inter-thread operation.  A 'sync' keyword would make it harder
> for people to see that.
>
[snip]

I concur with Alex. Queue is a more abstract structure like while-loop as
compared to gotoes.

Have a look at C.A.R. Hoare's CSP. It has been opened public just recently
on the internet. http://www.usingcsp.com/ Highly recommended. It will make
you dislike java's way of concurrency.

To taste CSP in python environment, try stackless python. In java
environment, try JCSP library.

June