Python isn't necessarily slow

[Siegfried Gonzi]

Peter Hansen wrote:
> 
> Siegfried Gonzi wrote:
 
> As far as absolute time goes, don't use a tool for that.  Just
> run the program and ask yourself "was that fast enough for my
> needs?".  If your program runs once a day, even 70 sec is fast
> enough.  If you run it every thirty seconds, I guess you have
> to go with the Clean version after all. :-)

Please: Do not use Clean! It took me (yesterday) 6 hours to re-use my
Clean version (only some minor changes due to some different
parameters), which I wrote last summer. The type-system and arrays are a
horror (it is nearly impossible to work with). Lists are okay; but
arrays in Clean will put some pearls on your forehead

Clean is very unflexible. 

Btw. I had expected it. I got some improved Lisp version (1/4 of my code
and 30% faster). I am not sure whether it is posted to comp.lang.python;
if not I can mail it (with the proper reference to the master which
wrote it) to you (drop me a note).

Normaly, I do not have any problems with verbose code. Okay, my Lisp
(and Clean) code does some extra work (for example: counting the lines
in a file for creating the array) which would be not necessary. You can
work with lists and copy them to an array (which my Python function --
honestly: by accident -- does).

I felt for and believed what computer scientists are preaching: pure
functional programming will improve your code and will let you produce
re-usable code. But after Clean I am not sure whether I am only just too
simple minded to grasp their concepts. 


S. Gonzi