Comment by greatgib
14 hours ago
For me it is quite bad, but just we are now used to it. In the same way that when you ask Windows users about all the bugs and problems they have with their system, they often say that they don't have any. And ten seconds later, will click "ok" on a random crash popup they didn't even read the content of.
You made a wild claim about ayncio and backed it up with a wild anecdote about windows and its users?
Can you elaborate? Why is Python asyncio bad?
Not the OP but my impression with asyncio was that it's great for the uses case it was built for (hence the "no problems") but if you need to do something a bit different it can become an annoyance (hence the "unexpected bugs").
I see it for a specialized solution for a specific class of problems, which can lead to surprises if your problem evolves. There are always trade-offs to be made (performance, flexibility, hardware cost, etc.), asyncio just has different characteristics than the alternatives. Maybe since a upper bound of concurrent users it is always a great (the best?) solution, someone with more experience along all the design and requirements space could comment.
I am always amused by "it's bad because it's bad at things it wasn't designed to be good at" rationalizations.
1 reply →