3 ms·

I'm not trying to suggest that you can't do faster computation in a lower-level language. But, a package manager doesn't do much computation. It mostly download

I'm not trying to suggest that you can't do faster computation in a lower-level language. But, a package manager doesn't do much computation. It mostly downloads, decompresses, and writes files. Yes, it has to solve constraints but that's not a bottleneck given most projects have at most a few 100 dependencies and not millions. I don't know python but in JavaScript, triggering 1000 downloads in parallel is trivial. Decompressing them, like in python, is calling out to some native function. Decompressing them in parallel in JS would also be trivial (no idea about python). Writing them in parallel is also trivial.

jerf 1y ago
Congratulations! You have proved that it is impossible for uv to be way, way faster than Python-based package managers! .... Unfortunately, there seems to be a problem here. When reality and theory conflict, reality wins. It sounds like you've drunk the same Kool-Aide I was referring to in my post. It's not true. When you're playing with 50x-100x slowdowns, if not more, it's really quite easy to run into user-perceptible slowdowns. A lot of engineers grotesquely underestimate how slow these languages are. I suspect it may be getting worse over time due to evaporative cooling, as engineers who do understand it also tend to have one reason or another to leave the language community at some point, and I believe (though I can not prove) that as a result the dynamic scripting language communities are actually getting worse and worse at realizing how slow their languages are. They're really quite slow.
- socalgal2 1y ago
  You seem to be implying rust = fast, the end. I'm implying algorithms and design choices = fast. Those decisions generally (though not always) are far more effective at speed than language choice. I watched the video linked above on uv. They went over the optimizations. The big wins had nothing to do with rust and everything to do with design/algo choices. You could have also done without the insults. You have no idea who I am and my experiences. I've shipped several AAA games written in C/C++ and assembly. I know how to optimize. I also know how dynamic languages work. I also know when people are making up bullshit about "it's fast because it's in rust!". No, that is not why it's fast.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - collinmanderson 1y ago
    I agree there are lot of big wins in uv that tools written in python could take advantage of, and ultimately I think uv is fast because they're obsessed with making it fast, which is why they chose to use rust. I don't see that same level speed obsession with the other tools. Instead of "It's fast because it's in rust", I'd say: "It's fast because they chose to use rust for their python tool, which means they care a lot about speed."

jerf 1y ago

Congratulations! You have proved that it is impossible for uv to be way, way faster than Python-based package managers! .... Unfortunately, there seems to be a problem here. When reality and theory conflict, reality wins. It sounds like you've drunk the same Kool-Aide I was referring to in my post. It's not true. When you're playing with 50x-100x slowdowns, if not more, it's really quite easy to run into user-perceptible slowdowns. A lot of engineers grotesquely underestimate how slow these languages are. I suspect it may be getting worse over time due to evaporative cooling, as engineers who do understand it also tend to have one reason or another to leave the language community at some point, and I believe (though I can not prove) that as a result the dynamic scripting language communities are actually getting worse and worse at realizing how slow their languages are. They're really quite slow.

socalgal2 1y ago
You seem to be implying rust = fast, the end. I'm implying algorithms and design choices = fast. Those decisions generally (though not always) are far more effective at speed than language choice. I watched the video linked above on uv. They went over the optimizations. The big wins had nothing to do with rust and everything to do with design/algo choices. You could have also done without the insults. You have no idea who I am and my experiences. I've shipped several AAA games written in C/C++ and assembly. I know how to optimize. I also know how dynamic languages work. I also know when people are making up bullshit about "it's fast because it's in rust!". No, that is not why it's fast.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- collinmanderson 1y ago
  I agree there are lot of big wins in uv that tools written in python could take advantage of, and ultimately I think uv is fast because they're obsessed with making it fast, which is why they chose to use rust. I don't see that same level speed obsession with the other tools. Instead of "It's fast because it's in rust", I'd say: "It's fast because they chose to use rust for their python tool, which means they care a lot about speed."