4 ms·
For the sake of anyone reading this thread who isn't in the know: many of these libraries are really written in C/C++ and have Python bindings.
by rwxrwxrwx 3y ago
For the sake of anyone reading this thread who isn't in the know: many of these libraries are really written in C/C++ and have Python bindings.
- mathisfun123 3y agoi said ported not implemented; the likelihood that any of those libraries sprout lisp bindings is about as likely as them being rewritten in lisp. so it's the same thing and the point is clear: i don't care about some zany runtime feature, i care about the ecosystem.
- rwxrwxrwx 3y agoStop moving the goalposts: your answer to a commenter who stated that Common Lisp was faster than Python (a fact) was a list of packages, many of which are (1) not even written in Python and (2) some of them actually do have Common Lisp bindings.