is there enough information?

[castironpi at gmail.com]

On Mar 3, 7:11 am, Jean-Paul Calderone <exar... at divmod.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:45:24 -0800, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfr... at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > [snip]
>
> >    Threads, in Python, are good for parallel processing of items that
> >tend to be I/O bound -- that is, stuff that blocks on lots of I/O calls
> >allowing other threads to execute until they block too. Due to the GIL
> >in the common Python implementation, threading is not useful for
> >number-crunching (CPU bound) processing.
>
> >    Now, there is a very vocal group that recommend Twisted style
> >asynchronous call-backs for everything in the world... But I think that
> >group tends to forget that Windows I/O is incompatible with the
> >low-level select() call often used to do parallel I/O -- leaving it only
> >useful for the network socket I/O, but not local file I/O processing.
>
> I'm not sure, but you seem to be implying that the only way to use Windows'
> asynchronous I/O APIs is with threads.  Actually, it is possible (and Twisted
> allows you) to use these as well without writing a threaded application.
>
> Perhaps you think it would be better to use them with threads, but that's
> certainly not the _only_ way to use them as you implied.
>
> Jean-Paul

What's the API call for it?