14 ms·
"Point still stands" is a pretty snarky response considering you got important details flat-out wrong while suggesting your "information" should be "well known
by obviouslygreen 13y ago
"Point still stands" is a pretty snarky response considering you got important details flat-out wrong while suggesting your "information" should be "well known to anyone who calls themselves a software engineer."
It's OK to be wrong, just don't be a jackass about it... people will take you a lot more seriously if you're gracious when they notice it.
- noelwelsh 13y agoLet me try to be clearer: The CPython implementation is very slow. There are many language implementations that are much faster (e.g. O'Caml, Haskell, Scala, Clojure, Java, Lua, C, probably Rust). Any one of these is likely to produce a system about as fast as the Go system with about the same amount of effort. Thus dwelling on Go being faster than Python is not interesting. What is interesting is the properties of Go that make it better or worse suited to particular organisations and problems. This is what I tried to get at in the second paragraph. The precise implementation strategy of Go/Python/V8/whatever is interesting in its own right but irrelevant to my points.
- zem 13y agoi'm guessing go is easier to translate python code to than any of the languages you mentioned, so "with about the same amount of effort" is not true.
- klibertp 13y agoWait, what? You mean that the claim that "they could write it in a number of other languages" was falsified? Or maybe you think that "Python VM is slow"? No? Then these points still stand. Geez. There is nothing special about ditching Python and getting speedups. Just last week I did the same with rewriting a service in Erlang - and I'm almost certain that it will perform even better on 8 cpus than even Go would.