His point was about using the language with the most productive / fastest libraries. Single-thread python vs 8-thread python vs java makes no difference if the majority of your processing time is spent inside a highly optimised native library.
I (or the OP) didn't tell anybody to use Java instead of Python. What we said is that it will be better for performance to optimize CPython's core speed instead of its multi-core capabilities.
So the remark about Python having more libs than Java is beside the point, since Java wasn't mentioned as a migration option, but as an example of how far single-core performance can be taken, and as an advice to try to get some of that to Python.
Oh, and the "but still it doesn't matter because Python has fast native libs" is not an argument either, because if that was enough people wouldn't care about parallelizing Python to get more speed. Which was the whole topic that started this thread.
I think you missed my whole point. Whoosh. (PS. This is silly :P)
> if [native code] was enough people wouldn't care about parallelizing Python
They would, for the same reason that they care about parellelizing Java -- once you're hitting the limits of single-thread speed (whether it's by being fast yourself or by having fast extensions), multithreading is next on the list.
Coldtea got my point pretty well. Everyone else gets a whoosh.
I'm not saying abandon Python for Java, I'm saying if you'll optimize Python, first optimize single-thread Python performance, before we get to parallel processing, because extracting performance out of parallel is hard, while languages like Java (and JavaScript recently) show they there's plenty more to be gained yet from that single thread.
His point was about using the language with the most productive / fastest libraries. Single-thread python vs 8-thread python vs java makes no difference if the majority of your processing time is spent inside a highly optimised native library.