On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:22:13 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Feb 5, 11:44 am, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> Why not a Python COMPILER? >> >> > What about a Python JIT hardware chip, so the CPU doesn't have to >> > translate. Although it seems to me that with today's dual and quad >> > core processors that this might be a mute point because you could >> > just use one of the cores. >> >> What about a chip that reads your mind and does what you want it to? >> >> I am sure that would be popular with all the frustrated computer users >> there are in the world. >> >> regards >> Steve >> -- >> Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC >> http://www.holdenweb.com/ > > I'm not sure where that came from. Microsoft had talked about a hardware > JIT for .NET a few years back. I was just wondering if anyone had > thought of it for python or anything like that.
Okay, you know how hard it is to create a software JIT compiler for a language as dynamic as Python? It's REALLY HARD, which is why it hasn't already been done[1]. Now you want that done in *hardware*, which is much harder. Who's going to spend the money on R&D? I'm sure there are thousands of l33t hax0rs out there who have thought "Wouldn't it be c00l if there was a chip I could put into my PC to make Python run a million times faster!!!". When I was younger and more stupi^W innocent I had a mad fegairy for Forth and Lisp chips, but their lack of financial viability and their unfortunate habit of actually being *slower* than running the language in software put a big dent in the idea. As general purpose CPUs got faster, the idea of making a specialist language chip is now pretty much dead. Even if you could find a niche market prepared to pay for it, "people who run Python programs" is probably not that market. [1] Apart from some specializing compilers like Pysco http://psyco.sourceforge.net/introduction.html -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
