I don't understand Python's Asyncio
The general sentiment in this thread seems to be that Guido et al &quot;blessed&quot; the Twisted way, it&#x27;s a pity and now using asyncio and friends is the only way to suspend a Python stack in a concurrent program besides using OS-level threads.<p>This is not correct. Green threads, as a programming paradigm, are just a sub-optimal (but cheaper) way of doing preemptive multitasking. Yes, switch is explicit, but user code can&#x27;t know what will switch. So you are not supposed to treat green threads any differently from OS threads. ie you still need your mutexes, semaphores etc. if you want to avoid race conditions. Again, that&#x27;s because the caller doesn&#x27;t know whether a function will yield execution to the next queued task at some point. Guido explains this point pretty well in one of his PyCon keynotes.<p>So green threads may be great but they don&#x27;t bring anything new to the table.<p>However, Twisted-style concurrency (aka cooperative multitasking) is a different paradigm. In Twisted,  you know that you only have one thread running at a time, so you actually don&#x27;t need any thread synchronization primitives when accessing non-local state. This simplifies things a great deal. Yes, not having to spawn a thread for every single concurrent IO operation has other great benefits, but that&#x27;s not the reason why CPython now has a blessed event loop -- it&#x27;s cooperative-multitasking-the-paradigm.<p>Before asyncio, there was no standard way of doing cooperative multitasking. Now there is and it&#x27;s baked right into the language. Use it if you like it. If not, the old ways of doing things work just fine in Python 3.<p>I&#x27;ll admit that the concurrency model in Python 3.4 was not perfect. However, what we have with Python 3.5 and up looks quite polished.