12 ms·
Yes, but no one is ever talking about pypy or jython implicitly. They are always mentioned by name because they represent <0.1% of all Python usage and are rele
by appplication 8mo ago
Yes, but no one is ever talking about pypy or jython implicitly. They are always mentioned by name because they represent <0.1% of all Python usage and are relegated essentially exclusively to niche or experimental use cases for power users.
It’s a bit like arguing people should start saying “homo sapiens” when referencing “people” for added precision. It may be useful to anthropologists but the rest of us really don’t need that. Similarly, CPython is really only a sensible level of precision in a discussion directly about alternative Python implementations.
(although in this case the original post is about implementation internals so I’d give it a pass)
- tonymet 8mo agoI like this debate because it triggers everyone’s pragmatic frustration with the philosophy of language. Are things defined by the dictionary or by everyday experiences?
- rich_sasha 8mo agoThis seems to be literally looking at the details of the C implementation of a Python interpreter. Exactly specifying the implementation makes sense here. You wouldn't say "how does the C++ compiler work" then look only at gcc.
- tonymet 8mo agoc++ / g++ is not comparable because the original c++ reference compilers are not commercially popular today. No one is using Strouvestroups compilers. CPython is Python. Every time your buddy says “just download python” you are using CPython . There’s no reason to be pedantic.
- shakna 8mo agog++ and clang are comparable. You need to specify the implementation.
- rich_sasha 8mo agoIf you know enough about Python to look at how the dict is implemented, you also know the difference between Python and CPython. It's not a beginners intro.