On 10/03/2016 01:59, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I think Bart is very old-school, and probably a bit behind the times when it comes to modern compiler and interpreter technologies.
That's true. I've reached a dead-end with what I can do with interpreted, dynamically typed byte-code, but it stills holds its own compared with other non-accelerated scripting languages, even PyPy sometimes.
(Although other JIT projects I think are faster than PyPy, eg. LuaJIT. Very compact too.)
(I could also go the JIT route, but it's very complicated and not much fun! And once you start generating custom native code, then you're competing with proper compilers.)
But that doesn't
matter: the old timers knew a thing or two, and in some ways the old days were better: http://prog21.dadgum.com/116.html I fear that Bart still holds quite a few misapprehensions about Python. But he seems happy to discuss the language
I have an interest in C and in Python because those are probably the two languages I'd be using now, if I hadn't been spoilt by having to create my own versions in the 1980s.
I've watched Python's development with interest because there were some parallels with the script language I was using for my applications (I decided my language needed byte-arrays bolted on; Python also added byte-arrays!)
Python however decided to be far more dynamic. (Making efficient interpreters a bit harder to write.)
-- Bartc -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
