DivX wrote:
On 20 lip, 12:46, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au> wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 03:19:48 -0700, DivX wrote:
On 20 lip, 02:52, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au> wrote:
[...]
I think that mixing assembly and python is a gimmick of very little
practical significance. If you really need the extra performance, check
out PyPy, Cython, Pyrex and Psyco.
--
Steven
I can agree with you about most of the arguments, but why he continues
to developing it. What he sees and we do not see?
Why ask us? You should ask him.
--
Steven
Be sure I will ask him, but before, I wanted to know your opinions
about it. Hear arguments on both sides...
Something's intrinsically wrong with the argument made in this thread
against generating assembly code. That's exactly what happens every
time you write code in C. The real question is whether the code
generator your friend is writing is better than the ones written by
dozens of C gurus over the years, and better tuned to the requirements
of his particular processor. Naturally, better can be measured in
several ways.
For example, I have a processor for which no C compiler is available.
So if I were to want optimized assembler, I might need to write one
myself, or use the language for which such a code generator has been
written.
DaveA
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
