Christopher Barker writes:
> I find this whole conversation confusing -- does anyone really think a
> substantial performance boost to cPython is not a "good thing"?
> [PyPy, Numba, Cython] are why Python is very useful today -- but
> none of them make the case that making cPython run faster isn't a
> worthy goal.
I don't understand why you think anybody, except maybe some crank who
caused the editors of Science or whatever it was to seriously
embarrass themselves, opposes the goal of making cPython run faster.
All I want is some sanity when advocating changes to Python. For
performance work, tell us how much faster cPython is going to be,
explain where you got your numbers, and let us decide how we'll use
the cycles saved. There's been a lot of nonsense peddled in support
of this proposal by the proponent and thirds parties, when all anybody
needs is
Mark says he can make cPython noticably faster
and
we believe him!
More important, Microsoft does.
Steve
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ESKRW4A2IMPTKPHF52W4R2NUD7BGYLLF/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
