you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 2 years ago (20 children)

Does Python have the ability to specify loops that should be executed in parallel, as e.g. Matlab uses parfor instead of for?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    python has way too many ways to do that. asyncio, future, thread, multiprocessing...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Of the ways you listed the only one that will actually take advantage of a multi core CPU is multiprocessing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    yup, that's true. most meaningful tasks are io-bound so "parallel" basically qualifies as "whatever allows multiple threads of execution to keep going". if you're doing numbercrunching in pythen without a proper library like pandas, that can parallelize your calculations, you're doing it wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I’ve used multiprocessing to squeeze more performance out of numpy and scipy. But yeah, resorting to multiprocessing is a sign that you should be dropping into something like Rust or a C variant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    I've always hated object oriented multi threading. Goroutines (green threads) are just the best way 90% of the time. If I need to control where threads go I'll write it in rust.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    nothing about any of those libraries dictates an OO approach.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If I have to put a thread object in a variable and call a method on it to start it then it's OO multi threading. I don't want to know when the thread spawns, I don't want to know what code it's running, and I don't want to know when it's done. I just want shit to happen at the same time (90% of the time)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Are you still using matlab? Why? Seriously

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    No, I'm not at university anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    We weren't doing any ressource extensive computations with Matlab, mainly just for teaching FEM, as we've had an extensive collection of scripts for that purpose, and pre- and some post processing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    I don't like that they don't write their own algorithms in any other language. I was trying to understand low-pass filters a while back and so many web pages were like, "Call this MATLAB function" or "here's a code generator that puts out bad C for specific filter parameters" Like no, I want the algorithm explained to me...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I was telling a colleague about how my department started using Rust for some parts of our projects lately. (normally Python was good enough for almost everything but we wanted to try it out)

    They asked me why we're not using MATLAB. They were not joking. So, I can at least tell you their reasoning. It was their first programming language in university, it's safer and faster than Python, and it's quite challenging to use.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment