[iskander]

>My point of view is that anyone who wants to write multithreaded code, shouldn't be trusted to. Making it easier for people to justify this kind of footgun is a problem.

Out of curiosity, have you done any Rust programming and used Rayon?

It's hard to convey how easy and impactful multi-threading can be if properly enclosed in a safe abstraction.

[kortex]

Python is dynamic AF and Rust's whole shtick is compile-time safety. Python was built from the ground up to be dynamic and "easy", Rust was meticulously designed to be strict and use types to enforce constraints.

It's hard to convey how difficult it would be to retrofit python to be able to truly "enclose multithreading in a safe abstraction".

[btilly]

I have only read about and played a tiny bit with Rust. But as I noted at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36342081, I see it as fundamentally different than the way people want to add multithreading to Python. People want to lock code in Python. But Rust locks data with its compile-time checked ownership model.

See https://blog.rust-lang.org/2015/04/10/Fearless-Concurrency.h... for more.