3 ms·
> But you can have both. It seems you misread the article as saying Python created a trade-off. Perhaps the author shouldn't have tried to create a surprise en
by msellout 11y ago
> But you can have both.
It seems you misread the article as saying Python created a trade-off. Perhaps the author shouldn't have tried to create a surprise ending. Regardless, the conclusion was that the Python implementation was both easier to code and more performant than the Java implementation.
- lmm 11y agoFrom the article: "Easy development comes at a cost of course. That initial experimental implementation was terribly slow, taking thirty seconds or more to cluster only a few thousand points." Even if the final implementation in mostly-Python is fast, having a slow feedback cycle during early development can be a huge cost.