3 ms·

> Would you be saying the same ("doesn't matter") if Python was instead made 2 times slower? I mean I guess at some point (5x, 20x, 100x) it would be unbearabl

> Would you be saying the same ("doesn't matter") if Python was instead made 2 times slower? I mean I guess at some point (5x, 20x, 100x) it would be unbearable, but yes. It's nice for the tool to get better "for free" but if it's so far from becoming the right tool for certain tasks, what's the benefit? Also it might not be "for free", I don't know what Guido is planning, but if you look at when people try to make Java or c# fast, it changes how you use the language by a lot. So yeah it's nice for python to get faster but I won't know the difference at 2x or 0.5x, because I just don't use it for things where that matters. YMMV.

coldtea 6y ago
>It's nice for the tool to get better "for free" but if it's so far from becoming the right tool for certain tasks, what's the benefit? How about 30 seconds of my time saved everytime I run a 1 minute current script? Which I might do dozens of times every day? (Actually I run huge pipelines that include pure Python processing, and I would absolutely love a double-the-speed raw python).
- lordnacho 6y ago
  Well clearly it would have use for you, but my guess from experience is most people use it like me, it's a nice to read language that wraps something, or doesn't do much pure processing. My rule is if it's about the cutting edge of speed, it's cpp. If I'll never care about speed, it's python. If I care a little bit about speed, JVM.