Thread imbalance

[Aahz]

In article <ds55tb$n00$1 at bagan.srce.hr>, Ivan Voras  <ivoras at fer.hr> wrote:
>Peter Hansen wrote:
>>
>> Ivan, what makes you say that Python is bad for threads?  Did the 
>> qualifcation "concurrently executing/computing" have some significance 
>> that I missed?
>
>Because of the GIL (Giant interpreter lock). It can be a matter of 
>opinion, but by "good threading implementation" I mean that all threads 
>in the application should run "natively" on the underlying (p)threads 
>library at all times, without implicit serialization. For example, Java 
>and perl do this, possibly also lua and C#. Python and Ruby have a giant 
>interpreter lock which prevents two threads of pure python code (not 
>"code written in C" :)) ) in one interperter process executing at the 
>same time.

When did Perl gain threads?  If you read Bruce Eckel, you also know that
the Java threading system has been buggy for something like a decade.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"19. A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming,
is not worth knowing."  --Alan Perlis