threading

[Chris Angelico]

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> wrote:
> In article <mailman.8970.1396843004.18130.python-list at python.org>,
>  Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> wrote:
>> > There is (or at least, was) another reason.  Creating a new process used
>> > to be far more expensive than creating a new thread.  In modern  Unix
>> > kernels, however, the cost difference has become much less, so this is
>> > no longer a major issue.
>>
>> Unix maybe, but what about Windows? Is it efficient to create
>> processes under Windows?
>
> Whether something works well on Windows is really not something I worry
> about a lot.

It's a concern for some of us. Maybe one day supporting Windows will
be like supporting Python 2.4 is now - something that only a few
people do, and knowingly pay the complexity price for it - but for
now, it's a fully-supported platform for a lot of Python software, so
in a generic discussion, I'd say it's important to note it. Threading
has NOT been entirely replaced with multiprocessing.

ChrisA