Re: which async framework?

From	Neal Becker <ndbecker2@gmail.com>
Subject	Re: which async framework?
Date	2014-03-12 07:16 -0400
References	<531E22DF.7030709@simplistix.co.uk> <1733040935416225908.878896sturla.molden-gmail.com@news.gmane.org> <mailman.8049.1394553908.18130.python-list@python.org> <lfnf02$q0c$1@reader1.panix.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.8083.1394622996.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

Grant Edwards wrote:

> On 2014-03-11, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
>> Sturla Molden <sturla.molden <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>> 
>>> Chris Withers <chris <at> simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
>>> > Hi All,
>>> > 
>>> > I see python now has a plethora of async frameworks and I need to try
>>> > and pick one to use from:
>>> > 
>>> > - asyncio/tulip
>>> > - tornado
>>> > - twisted
>>> 
>>> I'd go for using iocp, epoll and kqueue/kevent directly. Why bother to
>>> learn a framework? You will find epoll and kqueue/kevent in the select
>>> module and iocp in pywin32.
>>
>> Yes, why use a library when you can rewrite it all yourself?
>> Actually, you should probably issue system calls to the kernel directly,
>> the libc is overrated (as is portability, I suppose).
> 
> And don't bother with device drivers for the network adapters either.
> Just map their PCI regions in to user-space and twiddle the reigisters
> directly!  ;)
> 
> [I do that when testing PCI boards with C code, and one of these days
> I'm going to figure out how to do it with Python.]
> 

Use numpy with mmap

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: which async framework? Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> - 2014-03-11 16:01 +0000
  Re: which async framework? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-03-11 16:52 +0000
    Re: which async framework? jkn <jkn_gg@nicorp.f9.co.uk> - 2014-03-11 10:13 -0700
    Re: which async framework? Neal Becker <ndbecker2@gmail.com> - 2014-03-12 07:16 -0400

csiph-web