4 ms·

>> However, you bring in a common misconception I'm fighting with within my company for a long time. Python is not an interpreted language. My advice to you: S

>> However, you bring in a common misconception I'm fighting with within my company for a long time. Python is not an interpreted language. My advice to you: Stop fighting that "misconception". See the other responses to back up the idea that Python is interpreted. The existence of a Python compiler is also not relevant here, as the linked project does not list that as a supported Python variant. Let's assume that by some technicality you are not wrong. The "misconception" is so common that it is generally a fact in peoples mind. Rather than convince them, you are destroying your own credibility and probably making a fool of yourself in their eyes. And remember, I prefaced this with you not being wrong. It's worse for you if you are wrong. Just stop for your own good.

okaleniuk 4y ago
Sorry, I didn't make it clear before. I'm winning. My credibility is well protected by our AWS bills. Last year we adopted Numba for GPGPU programming. It is a Python compiler with LLVM back-end and full CUDA support. It generates the same code that NVCC (CUDA compiler for C++) does only it compiles Python code and not a C++ .cu dialect. No one in our organization writes heterogeneous code in C++ anymore.
BobbyJo 4y ago
Common nomenclature is a hard thing to rally against, and probably not worth the fight.
RHSman2 4y ago
Like asking an engineer not to argue a detail!!!
dymk 4y ago
While I also find arguing for the sake of arguing tiresome, the comment your responding to makes a good point. The linked project beats Go fibers using PyPy, which is JIT compiled, where hot codepaths are not interpreted. A language is a set of rules (hopefully described in a specification...) - you can have interpreted C++, or compiled Python. The popular implementations are just that: implementations, of which others exist. > Rather than convince them, you are destroying your own credibility and probably making a fool of yourself in their eyes. I'd understand where you were coming from had the parent comment not explained what they meant and given examples.

okaleniuk 4y ago

Sorry, I didn't make it clear before. I'm winning. My credibility is well protected by our AWS bills. Last year we adopted Numba for GPGPU programming. It is a Python compiler with LLVM back-end and full CUDA support. It generates the same code that NVCC (CUDA compiler for C++) does only it compiles Python code and not a C++ .cu dialect. No one in our organization writes heterogeneous code in C++ anymore.

BobbyJo 4y ago

Common nomenclature is a hard thing to rally against, and probably not worth the fight.

RHSman2 4y ago

Like asking an engineer not to argue a detail!!!

dymk 4y ago

While I also find arguing for the sake of arguing tiresome, the comment your responding to makes a good point. The linked project beats Go fibers using PyPy, which is JIT compiled, where hot codepaths are not interpreted. A language is a set of rules (hopefully described in a specification...) - you can have interpreted C++, or compiled Python. The popular implementations are just that: implementations, of which others exist. > Rather than convince them, you are destroying your own credibility and probably making a fool of yourself in their eyes. I'd understand where you were coming from had the parent comment not explained what they meant and given examples.