From: wtanksle at dolphin.openprojects.net (William Tanksley) Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:54:02 GMT Subject: Python IS slow ! [was] Re: Python too slow for real world References: <613145F79272D211914B0020AFF6401914DAD8@gandalf.digicool.com> Message-ID: Content-Length: 1583 X-UID: 245 On 28 Apr 1999 09:57:18 +0200, Markus Kohler wrote: >>>>>> "Brian" == Brian Lloyd writes: >[deltia] > Brian> Arne, >Python would be appropriate for much more problems if it would only be as fast >as other scripting languages. The bytecode interpreter IS significantly slower >than other byte code interpreted languages. Since we all know that python >is more productive than most other languages, this becomes sooner or later an >issue because one would not be able some tasks in python because it is just >to slow. Your data is correct (Python is slow for many things, slower than it needs to be), but your conclusion is wrong. Python isn't slow because its bytecode engine is slow; actually, although there's a lot of room for improvement, its bytecode engine is faster than many of the others out there. The reason it's slow is its runtime model. _Every_ function call requires a lookup in a hash table, just on the off-chance that the programmer changed the meaning of the function. >It seems to me that without a redesign of at least the bytecode for >function calls python's speed will not take off. Bytecode won't help enough -- the whole calling model needs to be examined. Fortunately, that's one of the things the 2.0 design process will be looking at. Like you, I hope that they consider Smalltalk as an example. And Oberon (SlimBinaries), and Eiffel (typing and general compile-time error catching), and ... >Markus -- -William "Billy" Tanksley "But you shall not escape my iambics." -- Gaius Valerius Catullus