On Nov 21, 4:17 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I often use Python to write small programs, in the range of 50-500 > lines of code. For example to process some bioinformatics data, > perform some data munging, to apply a randomized optimization > algorithm to solve a certain messy problem, and many different things. > For that I often use several general modules that I have written, like > implementation of certain data structures, and small general "utility" > functions/classes, plus of course several external modules that I keep > updated. > > Compared to other languages Python generally allows me to write a > correctly working program in the shorter time (probably because of the > Python shell, the built-in safeties, the doctests, the clean and short > and handy syntax, the quick write-run-test cycle, the logical design, > its uniformity, the availability of standard data structures and many > standard or external modules, and the low number (compared to other > languages) of corner cases and tricky semantic corners). > > Today Python is defined a dynamic language (and not a scripting > language, a term that few languages today seem to want attached to > them) but being dynamic isn't a binary thing, it's an analog quality, > a language can be less or be more dynamic. For example I think Ruby is > more dynamic than Python, Python is more dynamic than CLisp, CLips > seems more dynamic than C#/Java, Java is more dynamic than D, and D is > more dynamic than C++. Often such differences aren't sharp, and you > can find ways to things more dynamically, even with a less nice syntax > (or creating less idiomatic code). (In C#4 they have even added a > dynamic feature that may make languages like IronPython/Boo faster and > simpler to write on the dotnet). > > In the last two years I have seen many answers in the Python > newsgroups, and I have seen that some of the dynamic features of > Python aren't much used/appreciated: > - Metaclasses tricks > - exec and eval > - monkey patching done on classes > - arbitrary cmp among different types removed from Python 3 > While some new static-looking/related features are being introduced: > - ABCs and function signatures added > - More tidy exception tree > > So it seems that while C#/D are becoming more dynamic, Python/ > JavaScript are becoming a little less dynamic looking (and this I > think this is positive, because too much dynamism turns code into a > swamp, and too much rigid systems lead to bloat and other problems. > Note that there are another orthogonal solution: to use an advanced > flexible and handy static type system, as in Haskell). > > I have seen that in lot of those little programs of mine, or in a > significant percentage of their lines, I often don't use the dynamic > features of Python (this means that the same code can be written with > static types, especially if you can use templates like in C++/D, or a > flexible type system like in Haskell, and it also means that lot of > those small programs can be compiled by ShedSkin/Cython, with usually > a sharp decrease of running time). > > What are the dynamic features of Python more used in your programs? > (From this set try to remove the things that can be done with a > flexible static template system, like the D one, that for some things > is more handy and powerful than the C++ template system, and for other > things less powerful). > > If very little or no dynamic features are used in a program it may > seem a "waste" to use Python to write the code, because the final > program may be quite slow with no gain from the other features of > Python. (I think in such situations Python can be a good choice > anyway, because it's good to write working prototypes in a short > time). (The large number of solution of this page shows how a certain > class of Python programmers want more speed from their > programs:http://scipy.org/PerformancePython and note that page misses many > other solutions, like SIP, Boost Python, ShedSkin, Cinpy, Cython, > RPython, and so on). > > In the last year I have found two situations where exec/eval is a way > to reduce a lot of the complexity of the code, so if used with care > the dynamic features can be quite useful. > > Before ending this partially incoherent post, I'd also like to briefly > remind how the dynamic features are used in the Boo language: Boo > programs are generally statically typed, but duck types are used once > in a while to reduce the "pressure" of the static type system. You can > find more info on this on the Boo site. (Note that I have never seen a > good set of speed benchmarks to compare the performance of CPython to > Boo). > > Bye, > bearophile
http://scipy.org/PerformancePython is loading to slowly for my connection. How ironic (though it probably isn't Pythons fault). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
