3 ms·

vs CPython https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/fastest/vw-python3.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

by igouy 3y ago

vs CPython https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/fastest/vw-python3.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... vs Node https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/fastest/smalltalk.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

lifthrasiir 3y ago
Exactly. Comparing with CPython is too easy and arguably unfair, Smalltalk should be compared with JS instead and I think it has no chance in that setting.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Why should it be compared? We are not comparing Smalltalk JITs to Javascript JITs. The whole point of this conversation is CPython refusing to add one, and the lame excuses regarding its dynamic capabilities, when more dynamic languages have had a JIT for decades.
  - lifthrasiir 3y ago
    First, because CPython had more concerns than what Smalltalk implementations have, so such comparison would be unfair to Python. (See my topmost comment for example.) Second, my question was about the possibility that Smalltalk and others were unbearably slow without JIT, so JIT was not a matter of choice for them. I'm not aware of Smalltalk implementations that don't have JIT, so it would be easier to compare Smalltalk with another well-optimized JIT implementation instead---in this case JS.
    - whizzter 3y ago
      Not much in the Python language is categorically worse than features within JS when it comes to JIT creation. My thesis work was on AOT JS compilation, in it I refer to a bunch of experimental Python runtimes, Self,etc and the main issues in all these papers were basically the of same kind. Heck, even PyPy exists and iirc when it comes to the core language is almost entirely compatible (except for code that relies on ref-counting semantics but that code should apparently big fixed anyhow). https://www.pypy.org/compat.html https://www.pypy.org/compat.html The real summary is: CPython is a turd in many ways, the old C api holds it back and the community hasn't put the effort into using cross-implementation compatible C-bindings instead making PyPy or others a second class citizen.
pjmlp 3y ago
CPython is the one being compared here, and besides Pharo, better use an industrial strength one, like Cincom Smalltalk.
- igouy 3y ago
  Cincom Smalltalk is the one being compared.

by igouy 3y ago

lifthrasiir 3y ago

Exactly. Comparing with CPython is too easy and arguably unfair, Smalltalk should be compared with JS instead and I think it has no chance in that setting.

pjmlp 3y ago
Why should it be compared? We are not comparing Smalltalk JITs to Javascript JITs. The whole point of this conversation is CPython refusing to add one, and the lame excuses regarding its dynamic capabilities, when more dynamic languages have had a JIT for decades.
- lifthrasiir 3y ago
  First, because CPython had more concerns than what Smalltalk implementations have, so such comparison would be unfair to Python. (See my topmost comment for example.) Second, my question was about the possibility that Smalltalk and others were unbearably slow without JIT, so JIT was not a matter of choice for them. I'm not aware of Smalltalk implementations that don't have JIT, so it would be easier to compare Smalltalk with another well-optimized JIT implementation instead---in this case JS.
  - whizzter 3y ago
    Not much in the Python language is categorically worse than features within JS when it comes to JIT creation. My thesis work was on AOT JS compilation, in it I refer to a bunch of experimental Python runtimes, Self,etc and the main issues in all these papers were basically the of same kind. Heck, even PyPy exists and iirc when it comes to the core language is almost entirely compatible (except for code that relies on ref-counting semantics but that code should apparently big fixed anyhow). https://www.pypy.org/compat.html https://www.pypy.org/compat.html The real summary is: CPython is a turd in many ways, the old C api holds it back and the community hasn't put the effort into using cross-implementation compatible C-bindings instead making PyPy or others a second class citizen.

pjmlp 3y ago

CPython is the one being compared here, and besides Pharo, better use an industrial strength one, like Cincom Smalltalk.

igouy 3y ago
Cincom Smalltalk is the one being compared.