3 ms·

Neither does C. But that, and all the other languages you listed, are not Python. They have differing implementations, constraints and resources that make the c

by orf 9y ago

Neither does C. But that, and all the other languages you listed, are not Python. They have differing implementations, constraints and resources that make the comparison unfair and IMO invalid.

pjmlp 9y ago
C is not in the same league as the languages I mentioned, in regards to productivity and memory safety, while enjoying quite good performance. What is unfair about being as dynamic as Python and yet enjoying top quality JIT compilers? Just the community not caring about it and forcing everyone else to go down into C or somewhere else, it seems.
- orf 9y ago
  > Just the community not caring about it and forcing everyone else to go down into C or somewhere else, it seems. That, or the inherent dynamic nature of Python that makes it ridiculously hard to JIT (especially without breaking compatibility), and that a tiny subset of developers have enough experience (and will) to work on it as there is no Google willing to funnel buckets of money into making a V8 for Python, to the point where PyPy has reached an OK state after 10 years of development and a codebase that dwarfs CPython in size and complexity. I hate people who deride the community for not caring enough about adding a JIT. Yeah, that sure is the reason. Not mind-boggling technical limitations, nope, just pure laziness. Why don't you try? Exactly.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    I gave up on Python about version 2.0, and went to languages that care about having a JIT/AOT compiler from the get go, instead of forcing me to write C.
    - orf 9y ago
      A lot has changed in the 17 years since 2.0 was released. Performance is one of them. C and Python have sometimes overlapping use-cases, but often not. I'm not sure if your arguments still hold water, especially given projects like Cython and PyPy that give AOT and JIT compilation to the language so you don't have to write C.

by orf 9y ago

Neither does C. But that, and all the other languages you listed, are not Python. They have differing implementations, constraints and resources that make the comparison unfair and IMO invalid.

pjmlp 9y ago

C is not in the same league as the languages I mentioned, in regards to productivity and memory safety, while enjoying quite good performance. What is unfair about being as dynamic as Python and yet enjoying top quality JIT compilers? Just the community not caring about it and forcing everyone else to go down into C or somewhere else, it seems.

orf 9y ago
> Just the community not caring about it and forcing everyone else to go down into C or somewhere else, it seems. That, or the inherent dynamic nature of Python that makes it ridiculously hard to JIT (especially without breaking compatibility), and that a tiny subset of developers have enough experience (and will) to work on it as there is no Google willing to funnel buckets of money into making a V8 for Python, to the point where PyPy has reached an OK state after 10 years of development and a codebase that dwarfs CPython in size and complexity. I hate people who deride the community for not caring enough about adding a JIT. Yeah, that sure is the reason. Not mind-boggling technical limitations, nope, just pure laziness. Why don't you try? Exactly.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  I gave up on Python about version 2.0, and went to languages that care about having a JIT/AOT compiler from the get go, instead of forcing me to write C.
  - orf 9y ago
    A lot has changed in the 17 years since 2.0 was released. Performance is one of them. C and Python have sometimes overlapping use-cases, but often not. I'm not sure if your arguments still hold water, especially given projects like Cython and PyPy that give AOT and JIT compilation to the language so you don't have to write C.