But the async limitations are not because of python or java, just the
restrictions of the runtime (appengine).
I would imagine the same async limitations would apply to any other
language.

T


On Oct 12, 5:24 am, Demis Bellot <[email protected]> wrote:
> Cool, though Ringojs is no Expressjs and ultimately if I'm not mistaken all
> calls will eventually goes through Java's Sync IO and standardized API's no?
>
> I'm not sure why Java data access is slower than Pythons 
> (http://gaejava.appspot.com/) but I'm guessing this probably has to do
> needing to provide adapter implementations to Java's standard interfaces?
>
> I never liked adding layers of abstraction on top of already bloated API's
> and this would be a chance for a fresh start with no backward compatibility
> requirements and existing APIs to adhere to. I'm sure all the BigData access
> is async underneath no? And we know Memcached screams in Async/UDP mode! 
> (http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=39391378919)
>
> - Demis
>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:00 PM, gabriel munteanu <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > guys, thanks to java gae, we already have javascript on appspot
> > checkout ringojs , a ~commonjs framework.
> > or you can go to a much lower level through rhino itself.
>
> > cheers
>
> > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 11:38 PM, nickmilon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I think a new language should be out of the question, well until
> > > current platform is stabilized.
> > > But ....
> > >  then again who am I to tell big G what to do and what not.
> > > ;-)
>
> > > On Oct 11, 10:06 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" 
> > > <[email protected]<ikai.l%[email protected]>
>
> > > wrote:
> > >> Believe it or not, we've talked about this. There's a lot of interest in
> > V8
> > >> and JavaScript. From a technical standpoint, there are still advances
> > that
> > >> need to be made in V8 (garbage collection comes to mind) - see for
> > yourself
> > >> by searching for articles about Node.js and GC.
>
> > >> Ultimately, it comes down to resources, which is probably why we aren't
> > >> working on this right away. It makes more sense for us to harden our
> > Java
> > >> and Python runtimes, allow more classes into the whitelist, and look
> > into
> > >> ways we can support versions of Python that are higher than 2.5. As much
> > >> traction as Node.js has in the blogosphere and Hacker News, it's still
> > hard
> > >> to make a business case for a platform that has, at best, poor tooling
> > and a
> > >> small (albeit enthusiastic) core community. You have a gripe with Python
> > >> being slow - I'm surprised this is an issue, as most of your time is
> > spent
> > >> blocking on RPC calls, not interpreter gotchas. It doesn't matter how
> > fast
> > >> your Ferrari is if there are stop signs on every block.
>
> > >> I'd look into Heroku's experimental node.js support:
>
> > >>http://blog.heroku.com/archives/2010/4/28/node_js_support_experimental/
>
> > >> Try building an application using node.js as your full application
> > stack.
> > >> I'd love to see more article content about the challenges/benefits of
> > doing
> > >> this. There isn't enough, as far as I am concerned.
>
> > >> --
> > >> Ikai Lan
> > >> Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine
> > >> Blogger:http://googleappengine.blogspot.com
> > >> Reddit:http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine
> > >> Twitter:http://twitter.com/app_engine
>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 8:46 PM, John McLaughlin <
>
> > >> [email protected]> wrote:
> > >> > Thanks for the info Demis, I alway like listening to Douglas
> > >> > Crockford.  I also checked out
> > >> >http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=glass-node.
> > >> > Very interesting stuff, I can definitely see using it in the future.
> > >> > In particular using JavaScript as the templating engine seems really
> > >> > powerful.  So you've changed my mind.  However since I'm still worried
> > >> > about the "plethora" part of "...plethora of well-tested JavaScript
> > >> > frameworks and libraries available...", I'll say that if node.js,
> > >> > YUI3, and JSLint are defined as best practices -- I'm on board --
> > >> > server-side JavaScript all the way.
>
> > >> > - John
>
> > >> > On Oct 10, 4:21 pm, Demis Bellot <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> > > Unless I'm mistaken about recent advancements, Python belongs in the
> > same
> > >> > > performance category as Ruby, Perl and PHP i.e. slow compared
> > against
> > >> > native
> > >> > > or optimized managed languages.
>
> > >> > > I understand there are a number efforts underway to improve
> > performance
> > >> > > (e.g. using an LLVM backend withhttp://
> > >> > code.google.com/p/unladen-swallow/),
> > >> > > but I don't think this is actually being used yet?
> > >> > > I'm sure with having Guido onboard Python has been heavily optimized
> > for
> > >> > GAE
> > >> > > but there is only so much optimizations possible with CPython. The
> > >> > library
> > >> > > code may be fast (i.e. thin wrappers over C libs) but the users code
> > is
> > >> > > going to be interpreted and slow.
>
> > >> > > Since it impacts the performance of Chrome (one of Google's most
> > valuable
> > >> > > assets) and its millions of end users, I would think that more of
> > >> > Google's
> > >> > > engineering effort is behind making JavaScript as fast as possible
> > with
> > >> > V8
> > >> > > which I believe shows in the computer language shoot-out benchmarks,
> > >> > where
> > >> > > it looks as if V8 is several times faster than any Python
> > implementation
> > >> > > available:
> > >> >http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/which-programming-languages-are.
> > ..
>
> > >> > > The GAE Python API's also exposes sync IO requests and encourages
> > >> > buffering
> > >> > > which I believe also contributes a significant performance penalty
> > per
> > >> > > request.
> > >> > > This is only an educated guess and I'm not sure what these raw
> > language
> > >> > > numbers translates in GAE performance though it should be pretty
> > >> > indicative
> > >> > > of the perf advantages possible. With the lack of an actual V8
> > >> > > implementation, internal Google Engineers would have the best
> > insight as
> > >> > to
> > >> > > the potential gains if any (which I encourage on this thread).
>
> > >> > > As for the language impedance mismatch, I think that having code
> > from the
> > >> > > same application being able to run on both client and server is
> > heavily
> > >> > > underrated.
> > >> > > YUI is show casing some exciting possibilities they're doing around
> > >> > node.js
> > >> > > today:
> >http://www.slideshare.net/apmoore/running-yui-3-on-nodejs-bayjax
>
> > >> > > Where currently a lot of their JavaScript libraries already run on
> > >> > node.js,
> > >> > > but even more impressive than that they have implemented a
> > server-side
> > >> > W3C
> > >> > > DOM that enables the same code they use do generate their DHTML
> > Calendar
> > >> > > control can be run on the server and output rendered on clients that
> > have
> > >> > > JavaScript disabled. Much of Google's Closure Library and its
> > optimized
> > >> > > JavaScript compiler should be able re-used on the server as well.
>
> > >> > > I think this is only touching the ice berg, and Douglas Crockford
> > has an
> > >> > > inspirational video presentation on using JavaScript and an
> > event-loop
> > >> > > architecture (like node.js) on the server:
> > >> >http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=crockford-loopage
>
> > >> > > Before V8 and node.js I would not have considered it, however with
> > the
> > >> > > maturing of these technologies, the plethora of well-tested
> > JavaScript
> > >> > > frameworks and libraries available and what I believe is a
> > rejuvenated
> > >> > look
> > >> > > back into JavaScript - I think there has never been a better time to
> > >> > provide
> > >> > > a server-side JavaScript option in GAE.
>
> > >> > > - Demis
>
> > >> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 11:10 PM, John McLaughlin <
>
> > >> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >> > > > My gut reaction to this is that I'd rather have Python 3 over
> > server
> > >> > > > side JavaScript.  The Python API is already comparable to (and
> > >> > > > possibly faster than) the Java API.  Seehttp://
> > gaejava.appspot.com/
> > >> > > > and
>
> >http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1085898/choosing-java-vs-python-on.
> > >> > ..
> > >> > > > .
> > >> > > > So the performance argument is arguable at best.  Additionally I
> > don't
> > >> > > > think the value of a tight developer community can be
> > underestimated.
> > >> > > > In particular I find these forums to be a huge benefit for
> > learning
> > >> > > > best practices, tips, and tricks.  But I fear that introducing
> > another
> > >> > > > language -- and especially JavaScript, with it's tower of babel of
> > >> > > > libraries and coding styles -- would decrease the signal to noise
> > >> > > > ratio of the forums and the developer community.  And that would
> > >> > > > affect my productivity more than "language impedance".
>
> > >> > > > Don't get me wrong -- I really, really, like JavaScript.  It's an
> > >> > > > awesomely creative language for making highly functional user
> > >> > > > interfaces.  But I really, really like Python as well -- mostly
> > >> > > > because it is so clear, readable, predictable, and mostly has only
> > one
> > >> > > > right way to do things.  This seems like a better language choice
> > for
> > >> > > > server.  At least until GO (http://golang.org/) catches on ;-)
>
> > >> > > > John
>
> > >> > > > On Oct 10, 1:16 pm, Demis Bellot <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > Thanks for the link, I just added a little excerpt from my post
> > to
> > >> > the
> > >> > > > list.
>
> > >> > > > > I think the fact that so many other devs are coming to the same
> > >> > > > conclusion
> > >> > > > > independently speaks of how favourable a JavaScript for GAE
> > solution
> > >> > is.
>
> > >> > > > > I'm sure if Google released a poll to gauge public interest
> > about it,
> > >> > you
> > >> > > > > would get an positive response from the dev community.
>
> > >> > > > > Here's hoping for some positive steps in exploring the idea.
>
> > >> > > > > - Demis
>
> > >> > > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Robert Kluin <
> > >> > [email protected]
> > >> > > > >wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > I think it would be interesting too.  Star issue 35.
>
> ...
>
> read more »

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google App Engine" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.

Reply via email to