On 21/06/2015 01:29, Mark Lawrence wrote:
Another beasty I've just stumbled across which you may find interesting http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213133714000687
Blimey, that's a lot of waffle in there, but I suppose that's to be expected from a published paper.
I think the gist of it is, that you highlight specific Python functions that you need to be fast (add a decorator), then it tries to translate those into actual C++ by inferring types. All done transparently at runtime (although I imagine it would be hard to hide the huge machinery of a C++ compiler in action).
The benchmarks seem to be individual functions which it presumably successfully translated fully into C++, so it is effectively comparing CPython to C++.
It also puts in a good dig at PyPy by including one benchmark where it is 6 times as slow as CPython!
It's not clear why it's particularly useful for astrophysics. -- Bartc -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
