35 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
35 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
From: greg.ewing at compaq.com (Greg Ewing)
|
|
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 15:30:14 +1200
|
|
Subject: Python IS slow ! [was] Re: Python too slow for real world
|
|
References: <613145F79272D211914B0020AFF6401914DAD8@gandalf.digicool.com> <p5g15lmb35.fsf@bidra241.bbn.hp.com> <37272CA0.3F3F02A2@prescod.net>
|
|
Message-ID: <372E69C6.752A1164@compaq.com>
|
|
X-UID: 1807
|
|
|
|
Paul Prescod wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
> Is there any languge that is as easy to embed as Python, and also has
|
|
> full garbage collection?
|
|
|
|
Before I discovered Python, I played around with
|
|
Elk Scheme quite a lot. Its extension/embedding
|
|
interface is very nice - perhaps even nicer than
|
|
Python's, since there are no refcounts to lose
|
|
sleep over. And, like all Lisp/Scheme variants,
|
|
it has full GC.
|
|
|
|
I don't know how its speed compares with Python.
|
|
In principle, I imagine that a bytecoded Scheme
|
|
implementation could be made somewhat faster than
|
|
Python, because Scheme isn't quite so pathologically
|
|
dynamic - global var references can be implemented
|
|
without requiring a dictionary lookup on every
|
|
access, for example. But then Scheme doesn't
|
|
have modules or classes as part of the core language,
|
|
so it's hard to compare them directly.
|
|
|
|
Greg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|