> This is why threads aren't nearly as important as many programmers seem to think. Chances are, whatever application you're building can be done in a cleaner way using pipes + processes or green/user-space threads depending on the workload in question.
I think you're making wild claims based on putting up your overgeneralized strawman (i.e., "threads aren't nearly as important as many programmers seem to think") that afterwards you try to water down with weasel words ("depending on the workload in question").
Threads are widely used because they bring most of the benefits of processes (concurrent control flow, and in multicore processors also performance) without the constraints and limitations they bring (exclusive memory space, slow creation, performance penalty caused by serialization in IPC, awkward API, etc).
In multithreaded apps, to get threads to communicate between each other all you need to do to is point to the memory address of the object you instantiated. No serialization needed, no nothing. You simply cannot beat this in terms of "clean way" of doing things.
> It can be less convenient, but (...)
That's quite the euphemism, and overlooks why threads are largely preferred.
I think you're making wild claims based on putting up your overgeneralized strawman (i.e., "threads aren't nearly as important as many programmers seem to think") that afterwards you try to water down with weasel words ("depending on the workload in question").
Threads are widely used because they bring most of the benefits of processes (concurrent control flow, and in multicore processors also performance) without the constraints and limitations they bring (exclusive memory space, slow creation, performance penalty caused by serialization in IPC, awkward API, etc).
In multithreaded apps, to get threads to communicate between each other all you need to do to is point to the memory address of the object you instantiated. No serialization needed, no nothing. You simply cannot beat this in terms of "clean way" of doing things.
> It can be less convenient, but (...)
That's quite the euphemism, and overlooks why threads are largely preferred.