Skip to main content

I figured out why Python's threading library bugs me

Reading Aahz's 2001 OSCon presentation, I ran into a slide that crystalized it [paraphrased]:

  • Perl: There's more than one way to do it
  • Python: There should be one (preferably only one) obvious way to do it
  • Python's threading library is philosophically perl-ish

That pretty much says it all. Well, that and the main classes are (still) virtually undocumented.

Update: I'm referring to the synchronization classes in this module, not the Thread class, which is straightforward enough.

Comments

Ian Bicking said…
What's the other way? I always use threading, and that's about it. I guess you can choose to subclass threading.Thread, or you can just use the target argument to Thread, but that's not a huge difference in practice. Certainly I don't like the fact that there's a class at all, a simple function-based interface would be much nicer; another case of inappropriate Java conventions. But eh, it's not that big a deal.
10:56 AM
Jonathan Ellis said…
My fault for providing insufficient context.

I (and the linked presentation) are referring to the synchronization classes provided by the threading module.
12:40 PM
Tim Lesher said…
I don't have a problem with the number of sync objects, really. It seems to me a case of horses for courses. The documentation is decent but not exhaustive--or are you talking about the lack of docstrings?

At any rate, I'm more concerned about the lack of "debuggability" of Python threads (although I haven't re-checked this since around Python 2.2).
8:14 AM
Anonymous said…
There are lots of other things to dislike about python threads. How about the global interpreter lock? Or the inability to send an asynchronous signal to a particular thread? Or all the boilerplate code that has to be present just to start a thread the "right" way?
6:50 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

PyCon Python IDE review

I presented an IDE review at PyCon last Friday. It was basically a re-review of what I thought were the 3 most promising IDEs from the Utah Python User Group IDE review , to which I added SPE, which was by far the most popular of the ones we left out that time. The versions reviewed are: PyDev 1.0.2 SPE 0.8.2.a Komodo 3.5.2 Wing IDE 2.1 beta 1 I'd intended to base my presentation around a comparison of writing a smallish program in each of the IDEs, but the more I tried to make this not suck, the more I realized it was a losing proposition. Instead, I decided to try to focus on the features in each that most set them apart from the others (both positive and negative); this seemed more likely be useful. (I did a new feature matrix for this review, which is included after my comments. The slides I used are also up, at http://utahpython.org/jellis/pycon-ides.pdf , but aren't very useful absent video of the presentation itself. Hence this post.) PyDev PyDev has g...
43 comments
Read more

Why PHP sucks

(July 8 2005) Apparently I got linked by some PHP sites, and while there were a few well-reasoned comments here I mostly just got people who only knew PHP reacting like I told them their firstborn was ugly. These people tended to give variants on one or more themes: All environments have warts, so PHP is no worse than anything else in this respect I can work around PHP's problems, ergo they are not really problems You aren't experienced enough in PHP to judge it yet As to the first, it is true that PHP is not alone in having warts. However, the lack of qualitative difference does not mean that the quantitative difference is insignificant. Similarly, problems can be worked around, but languages/environments designed by people with more foresight and, to put it bluntly, clue, simply don't make the kind of really boneheaded architecture mistakes that you can't help but run into on a daily baisis in PHP. Finally, as I noted in my original introduction, with PHP, ...
30 comments
Read more

A review of 6 Python IDEs

(March 2006: you may also be interested the updated review I did for PyCon -- http://spyced.blogspot.com/2006/02/pycon-python-ide-review.html .) For September's meeting, the Utah Python User Group hosted an IDE shootout. 5 presenters reviewed 6 IDEs: PyDev 0.9.8.1 Eric3 3.7.1 Boa Constructor 0.4.4 BlackAdder 1.1 Komodo 3.1 Wing IDE 2.0.3 (The windows version was tested for all but Eric3, which was tested on Linux. Eric3 is based on Qt, which basically means you can't run it on Windows unless you've shelled out $$$ for a commerical Qt license, since there is no GPL version of Qt for Windows. Yes, there's Qt Free , but that's not exactly production-ready software.) Perhaps the most notable IDEs not included are SPE and DrPython. Alas, nobody had time to review these, but if you're looking for a free IDE perhaps you should include these in your search, because PyDev was the only one of the 3 free ones that we'd consider using. And if you aren...
36 comments
Read more