3 ms·

Of course, a Python program can also smoke a V8 JS program, this happens too. And it is not realistic to compare Python to JS while excluding any commonly used

by pekk 14y ago

Of course, a Python program can also smoke a V8 JS program, this happens too. And it is not realistic to compare Python to JS while excluding any commonly used optimization strategy for the former, whether that be C or PyPy or using different language constructs.

kkowalczyk 14y ago
Neither C nor PyPy is "commonly used optimization strategy" so the comparison is very much correct. People reach for C when they are desperate for performance, have the skills to do C, have the time to do C and are ok with loosing the cross-platform capabilities. Pure python code runs on mac/windows/unix (90% of the time). The moment you add a C module to the mix, you end up with the usual cross-platform mess (separate installers for each platform, complicated build processes etc.).
- icebraining 14y ago
  Reaching for C doesn't have to mean writing C; it can just be using a different library and adapting your code to call it.
coldtea 14y ago
>Of course, a Python program can also smoke a V8 JS program, this happens too. A cleverly written Python program can indeed beat a naively written V8/JS program. But if they have the same program-level complexity and the Python program doesn't delegate to C libraries, V8 wins. That is: when using the same algorithms in both languages, V8 is faster. We have h264 decoders using Javascript, and even ports of the QT widget stuck into pure JS (using emscripten). And they run in acceptable speed. Those would be hopeless in pure Python without adding new ad-hoc C extensions. >And it is not realistic to compare Python to JS while excluding any commonly used optimization strategy for the former, whether that be C or PyPy or using different language constructs. Well, it's fair, in the sense that mainstream JS is fast, whereas mainstream Python (CPython) is not. And you don't have to resort to stuff like Cython, SWIG and such with JS to get that performance.

by pekk 14y ago

kkowalczyk 14y ago

Neither C nor PyPy is "commonly used optimization strategy" so the comparison is very much correct. People reach for C when they are desperate for performance, have the skills to do C, have the time to do C and are ok with loosing the cross-platform capabilities. Pure python code runs on mac/windows/unix (90% of the time). The moment you add a C module to the mix, you end up with the usual cross-platform mess (separate installers for each platform, complicated build processes etc.).

icebraining 14y ago
Reaching for C doesn't have to mean writing C; it can just be using a different library and adapting your code to call it.

coldtea 14y ago

>Of course, a Python program can also smoke a V8 JS program, this happens too. A cleverly written Python program can indeed beat a naively written V8/JS program. But if they have the same program-level complexity and the Python program doesn't delegate to C libraries, V8 wins. That is: when using the same algorithms in both languages, V8 is faster. We have h264 decoders using Javascript, and even ports of the QT widget stuck into pure JS (using emscripten). And they run in acceptable speed. Those would be hopeless in pure Python without adding new ad-hoc C extensions. >And it is not realistic to compare Python to JS while excluding any commonly used optimization strategy for the former, whether that be C or PyPy or using different language constructs. Well, it's fair, in the sense that mainstream JS is fast, whereas mainstream Python (CPython) is not. And you don't have to resort to stuff like Cython, SWIG and such with JS to get that performance.