Hello,
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:27:50 +0100 Thomas Wouters <tho...@python.org> wrote: > > And it may not be immediately obvious from Mark's plans, but as far as we > can tell, the proposal is for speeding up pure-Python code. It will do > little for code that is hampered, speed-wise, by CPython's object model, or > threading model, or the C API. We have no idea how much this will actually > matter to users. Making pure-Python code execution faster is always > welcome, but it depends on the price. It may not be a good place to spend > $500k or more, and it may even not be considered worth the implementation > complexity. FWIW, I think it would definitely be worth it. Performance will be a *major* hurdle for Python in the years to come (the other hurdle being ease of deployment). > Thinking specifically of corporate sponsorship, it's very much the question > if pure-Python code speedup is something companies would be willing to > invest serious funds in. I would suggest for example talking to Quansight, Numfocus, the NVidia Rapids team, and/or coiled.io . There are areas of scientific computing where better pure Python performance would help (one potential area is the Dask scheduler, another is the Numba JIT compiler). Another prominent area is server-side Web development, but I have noone to suggest there :-) Best regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/RCB5JE22QQRNYU76IDAKYCF3VYWHUDFZ/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
