On 2011-01-18, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Tim Harig <user...@ilthio.net> wrote: >> Even assuming that PyPy does actually manage to reach within a magnitude >> of C with the extra effort required to leverage two languages, why >> would I bother when I can do it with one? PyPy and similar methods >> where great when there was no other mid level alternative that supported >> Python like features. Now it just seems like using Python as a hammer >> for every problem whether or not it is the right tool for the job. > > You clearly have no idea what you're talking about regarding PyPy. You > could at least have googled it before speaking about it.
No, I have watched several such projects over the years. Pysco, Unladen Swallow, Cython, PyPy, Shedskin, etc. Source to source translators, JITs, and C language integration all just add to complexity. You can't do this, you can't do that, you have to learn a new way of doing something else, ad nauseum. So when something new that provided Python like capabilities without many of Python's drawbacks came along, I jumped on it. It provides a much cleaner solution to the problem without kludges. I will use Python for what it does well and cleanly. For the rest, there are now better tools. Once again, its about the right tool for the right job. > Again, you don't know what you're talking about WRT PyPy. Nor do I really want to. I have found a much simpler solution to the problem. I would recommend it to many others that like the Python language but who occassionaly struggle with its implementation constraints. I would say that I am sorry that it doesn't work for you; but, you seem to prefer Java and Pypy anyway so we are both happy. >> 2. There is a difference in binding to a solution that is already written >> in another language so as to not reinvent a wheel and implementing >> a *new* library in another language to be used exclusively >> with Python. > > Even if that binding is done for performance reasons? Yep, that is pretty much the summation of my dual language argument. I don't expect a pure Python implementation of curses since there is a perfectly good C library available to bind to. Why reinvent the wheel. Resorting to writing packages in another language or compiling Python code into another source language is a kludge necessary because of the performance characteristics of the language. I suppose that is an acceptable kludge when that is your only alternative. For me it no longer is. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
