4 ms·

Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance rather than C/++ for embedded systems? Does Python work well for lower level applications (in terms o

Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance rather than C/++ for embedded systems? Does Python work well for lower level applications (in terms of hardware access)?

ericfrederich 9y ago
1) probably not though with Cython you can get close 2) I imagine any hardware access is done though a Python module written in C. ... I'm just speculating. I know nothing about embedded systems
- blattimwind 9y ago
  > Cython I wonder why everyone in this thread thinks that Cython works with CPython-incompatible implementations (like MicroPython or Zerynth)?
  - ericfrederich 9y ago
    Aren't there embedded boards that run full CPython? Raspberry Pi runs the full blown CPython doesn't it?
masklinn 9y ago
> Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance If you're talking about machine performances, the opposite, even for a dedicated dialect like micropython. The benefits are in safety, readability and ease of development.
- syntaxing 9y ago
  Both in terms of embedded systems application: What makes micropython safer and easier to develop compared to C/++? In terms of safety, is there better memory allocation and hardware control through Python? I would imagine micropython would be more inefficient and more prone to hardware error. As for the ease of development, wouldn't C/++ be better? Sure, it's harder to read but C/++ seems like the right tool for this particular job. I'm pretty curious because I'm pretty fluent in Python and I have been learning C++ for more lower level stuff mainly for speed reasons. I still program most of uC through C++ so I'm curious if I should learn micropython if it provides substantial benefits.
  - masklinn 9y ago
    > Both in terms of embedded systems application: What makes micropython safer and easier to develop compared to C/++? Python is a GC'd (reference-counted in CPython and probably µpython) and memory-safe language so it should be less prone to memory corruption, although it is more likely to open you up to resource exhaustion. > In terms of safety, is there better memory allocation and hardware control through Python? These are not what is usually understood by "safety" in programming. > I would imagine micropython would be more inefficient Definitely, the overhead of micropython would be substantial (even more so as it can't leverage compiler optimisations) so it's a tradeoff between hardware requirements and ease of development/time to market. IIRC micropython also supports only a relatively small subset of all embedded systems. See http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/speed_python.html http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/spee..., http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/constrained.html http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/cons... > As for the ease of development, wouldn't C/++ be better? Generally speaking python is more expressive and more readable than C++ code, which makes it easier to write (develop) Python. C++ is more finicky, thus harder to develop.
    - elcritch 9y ago
      > > In terms of safety, is there better memory allocation and hardware control through Python? > These are not what is usually understood by "safety" in programming. In many embedded and RTOS contexts, safety and allocation and hardware control are very difficult to distinguish. > > As for the ease of development, wouldn't C/++ be better? > Generally speaking python is more expressive and more readable than C++ code, which makes it easier to write (develop) Python. C++ is more finicky, thus harder to develop. C++ is a huge pain with loose type casting behavior (e.g. is this an long or does this expression convert it to an unsigned long?). But then again Python has very _loose_ descriptions of int and float types at all. For me that makes doing bit manipulation for talking to peripherals more opaque rather than less so.
      - masklinn 9y ago
        > But then again Python has very _loose_ descriptions of int and float types at all. Not at all. Python has unbounded-size integers and doubles. There's nothing loose about it.
blattimwind 9y ago
Python has a large performance disadvantage compared to C/C++. However, it is much faster to develop even by less skilled workers, thus quicker time to market and lower cost of development.
zwieback 9y ago
Definitely the opposite but gluing together highly optimized libs with Python bindings like numpy, OpenCV etc. is a viable approach on higher-level embedded systems to achieve faster development speed.
xapata 9y ago
Depends on how much value you get from jit-compiling vs static compiling. It's possible that a jitted language would be faster after a warm-up.
Rotareti 9y ago
> Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance rather than C/++ No, but you can rapidly develop applications in Python and when performance becomes an issue, you just rewrite certain modules in C/C++/Rust/Go/etc. There is a module called ctypes [0] in the Python standard lib that lets you import modules written in C. [0] https://docs.python.org/3/library/ctypes.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/ctypes.html

Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance rather than C/++ for embedded systems? Does Python work well for lower level applications (in terms of hardware access)?

ericfrederich 9y ago

1) probably not though with Cython you can get close 2) I imagine any hardware access is done though a Python module written in C. ... I'm just speculating. I know nothing about embedded systems

blattimwind 9y ago
> Cython I wonder why everyone in this thread thinks that Cython works with CPython-incompatible implementations (like MicroPython or Zerynth)?
- ericfrederich 9y ago
  Aren't there embedded boards that run full CPython? Raspberry Pi runs the full blown CPython doesn't it?

masklinn 9y ago

> Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance If you're talking about machine performances, the opposite, even for a dedicated dialect like micropython. The benefits are in safety, readability and ease of development.

syntaxing 9y ago
Both in terms of embedded systems application: What makes micropython safer and easier to develop compared to C/++? In terms of safety, is there better memory allocation and hardware control through Python? I would imagine micropython would be more inefficient and more prone to hardware error. As for the ease of development, wouldn't C/++ be better? Sure, it's harder to read but C/++ seems like the right tool for this particular job. I'm pretty curious because I'm pretty fluent in Python and I have been learning C++ for more lower level stuff mainly for speed reasons. I still program most of uC through C++ so I'm curious if I should learn micropython if it provides substantial benefits.
- masklinn 9y ago
  > Both in terms of embedded systems application: What makes micropython safer and easier to develop compared to C/++? Python is a GC'd (reference-counted in CPython and probably µpython) and memory-safe language so it should be less prone to memory corruption, although it is more likely to open you up to resource exhaustion. > In terms of safety, is there better memory allocation and hardware control through Python? These are not what is usually understood by "safety" in programming. > I would imagine micropython would be more inefficient Definitely, the overhead of micropython would be substantial (even more so as it can't leverage compiler optimisations) so it's a tradeoff between hardware requirements and ease of development/time to market. IIRC micropython also supports only a relatively small subset of all embedded systems. See http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/speed_python.html http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/spee..., http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/constrained.html http://docs.micropython.org/en/v1.8.6/pyboard/reference/cons... > As for the ease of development, wouldn't C/++ be better? Generally speaking python is more expressive and more readable than C++ code, which makes it easier to write (develop) Python. C++ is more finicky, thus harder to develop.
  - elcritch 9y ago
    > > In terms of safety, is there better memory allocation and hardware control through Python? > These are not what is usually understood by "safety" in programming. In many embedded and RTOS contexts, safety and allocation and hardware control are very difficult to distinguish. > > As for the ease of development, wouldn't C/++ be better? > Generally speaking python is more expressive and more readable than C++ code, which makes it easier to write (develop) Python. C++ is more finicky, thus harder to develop. C++ is a huge pain with loose type casting behavior (e.g. is this an long or does this expression convert it to an unsigned long?). But then again Python has very _loose_ descriptions of int and float types at all. For me that makes doing bit manipulation for talking to peripherals more opaque rather than less so.
    - masklinn 9y ago
      > But then again Python has very _loose_ descriptions of int and float types at all. Not at all. Python has unbounded-size integers and doubles. There's nothing loose about it.

blattimwind 9y ago

Python has a large performance disadvantage compared to C/C++. However, it is much faster to develop even by less skilled workers, thus quicker time to market and lower cost of development.

zwieback 9y ago

Definitely the opposite but gluing together highly optimized libs with Python bindings like numpy, OpenCV etc. is a viable approach on higher-level embedded systems to achieve faster development speed.

xapata 9y ago

Depends on how much value you get from jit-compiling vs static compiling. It's possible that a jitted language would be faster after a warm-up.

Rotareti 9y ago

> Is there a benefit on using Python in terms of performance rather than C/++ No, but you can rapidly develop applications in Python and when performance becomes an issue, you just rewrite certain modules in C/C++/Rust/Go/etc. There is a module called ctypes [0] in the Python standard lib that lets you import modules written in C. [0] https://docs.python.org/3/library/ctypes.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/ctypes.html