Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> writes:
> Alain Ketterlin <al...@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>:
>
>> The real nice thing that makes Julia a different language is the
>> optional static typing, which the JIT can use to produce efficient code.
>> It's the only meaningful difference with the current state of python.
>
> I'm guessing the two main performance roadblocks for Python are:
>
> 1. The dot notation is a hash table lookup instead of a fixed offset to
> a vector.
>
> 2. The creation of a class instance generates a set of trampolines for
> all methods. The trampolines are ordinary fields that can be
> overridden.
Do you suggest this as a checklist to decide whether Python is the
appropriate language for a task? ("Do you really need any of these? If
yes, use python.")
> Both features are critical to Python's "sex appeal;" I wouldn't give
> them up for performance gains.
There are cases where performance matters (especially, when it is
directly related to your electricity bill).
> Producing an effective JIT for Python seems like a formidable challenge
> but not impossible in principle. After all, the developer *could*
> provide that static typing information in, like, 99.9% of the code.
Not 99% of the code; the code that runs 99% of the time.
> That would be feat worthy of a Millennium Technology Prize.
Here is a fairly interesting blog post about what the WebKit developpers
do for javascript (including profile-directed type inference, as they
call it):
https://www.webkit.org/blog/3362/introducing-the-webkit-ftl-jit/
-- Alain.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
