4 ms·
> Please CPython, upstream this or something like it. There reaches a point where this whole zeal about readability becomes idealistic and hurts real-world prag
by Jiejeing 5y ago
> Please CPython, upstream this or something like it. There reaches a point where this whole zeal about readability becomes idealistic and hurts real-world pragmatic goals. It's hurting the language and we can do better.
I don’t know here you are picking this from. What’s hurting performance is not readability, it is the flexibility of what you can do (hence: strict modules/static python in Cinder) which means it is really hard to perform optimizations as no assumptions hold unless you turn down the more permissive language features.
Another one is backwards compatibility, and I might get some flak from people still complaining about it more than 10 years after python 3.0, but things are still 99.9% compatible with decades-old code in python 3.9, and you can’t throw that away.
Finally, the numbers of people dedicated to improving CPython performance in an upstreamable fashion is ridiculously low compared to other languages, and especially compared to the number of businesses using it. There are quite few people working on performance, but not many of them appear to be doing it in the open and with the goal of upstreaming it in a non-breaking manner (kudos to the instagram engineers, I guess).
- Redoubts 5y ago> Finally, the numbers of people dedicated to improving CPython performance in an upstreamable fashion is ridiculously low compared to other languages Yeah because Guido and the maintainers have proclaimed multiple times that they prefer a simple implementation for teachability, over performance minded design. That’s where this entire complaint is coming from.
- oblio 5y agoThis was a reasonable requirement for an academic language but it's utterly dogmatic for one of the most used languages in the world.