> If you wanted extreme performance Python is a lousy choice in the first place.
Agreed; assuming the problem is "we need blazing performance here," I don't think you should choose Python.
However, that doesn't preclude looking at improving performance. E.g. I have a python process that takes 10 minutes to run. If I rewrite it into pure C, I can get it down to less than a second, but if I (minimally) rewrite it to take advantage of concurrency, I can get it down to two minutes, I see that as potentially worth it. As in, I need to run this process 7 or 8 times a days, the hypothetical concurrent Python makes a lot of sense. If I need it to run 1000 times an hour though...
I see where you're coming from but I don't think parallel python is an oxymoron, I see it more as the old range() vs. xrange() issue. It's been awhile, but as I recall, there is no reason to ever use range(), but if I see it in someone's code, I'm not going to start freaking out. Similarly, I think rewriting a Python 'subroutine' to something faster when the optimization is found to be necessary is well-covered ground, and is incidentally more essential than parallel python, but I see value here.
I guess I can summarize my position to considering better performance (parallel python) versus extreme performance...
Agreed; assuming the problem is "we need blazing performance here," I don't think you should choose Python.
However, that doesn't preclude looking at improving performance. E.g. I have a python process that takes 10 minutes to run. If I rewrite it into pure C, I can get it down to less than a second, but if I (minimally) rewrite it to take advantage of concurrency, I can get it down to two minutes, I see that as potentially worth it. As in, I need to run this process 7 or 8 times a days, the hypothetical concurrent Python makes a lot of sense. If I need it to run 1000 times an hour though...
I see where you're coming from but I don't think parallel python is an oxymoron, I see it more as the old range() vs. xrange() issue. It's been awhile, but as I recall, there is no reason to ever use range(), but if I see it in someone's code, I'm not going to start freaking out. Similarly, I think rewriting a Python 'subroutine' to something faster when the optimization is found to be necessary is well-covered ground, and is incidentally more essential than parallel python, but I see value here.
I guess I can summarize my position to considering better performance (parallel python) versus extreme performance...