CPython vs. Jython/JPython

[jay.krell at cornell.edu]

But where Java is available, maybe it provides more value than Python? I
realize this is debatable, but I tend to believe it.

Really. stdio.h is more portable than Java and Python. The code int F()
{return 0;} is even more portable, or better yet #if defined(__STDC__) ||
__cplusplus int F() { return 0; } #else F() { return 0; }. Portability
trades off with features.

And Windows is portable to a huge variety of x86 hardware. People don't
appreciate Windows's portability..

I guess VAX/VMS and Amiga are the main platforms that host Python but not
Java?
And the first is because Java pretty much requires IEEE 754 hardware?

 ..Jay

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Dries <jdries at mail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
To: python-list at python.org <python-list at python.org>
Date: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: CPython vs. Jython/JPython


>Ingo Adler wrote:
>>
>> Bill de hÓra wrote:
>>
>> > ANSI C is very possibly more portable than Java.
>>
>> Really? What are the #ifdefs for in "ANSI C" - Python?
>
>As Bjarne Stroustoup sais in his FAQ answer to the question how Java
>compares to C++: Java isn't really platform independent! Java is a
>platform. A virtual platform that can be superimposed on many other
>hardware/OS platforms, but a platform nonetheless. The only platform
>independent piece of Java is the JVM, which, by the way, is written in
>C, and I expect it to have just as many #ifdefs as does the Python
>interpreter.
>
>The question of portability is not whether Java source of even byte code
>is portable across java interpreters, because it by definition is (or
>should be, if everybody, MS included, stuck to the JVM spec). The
>question of portability is how portable the Java platform itself (i.e.
>the JVM) really is.
>And it remains a fact that (today at least) the Python platform is
>available on several hardware/OS combinations where there's no Java
>platform available today.
>
>>
>> > Raw C written by a good programmer is typically more efficient in space
...
>>
>> There are benchmarks that show the opposite.
>
>Could you give a pointer to these benchmarks?
>
>>
>
>Regards,
>Jan
>--
>http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list