Python future performance and speed

[Neuruss]

> OK guys.
> 
> Now that you've debated at length of the first question addressed by
> Neuruss (Python limitations for mainstream acceptance), why not come
> back to the other aspects addressed:
> 
> - dynamic languages getting closer to static languages in terms of
> speed
> - the future of Psyco, Pypy, Starkiller, Ironpython and other similar
> projects.


( Thanks Arthur for getting this back on track... )

Regarding Starkiller, I'm eagerly waiting for its release.
I sent Mike Salib an email asking for the current state of the project
(this was by the end of june) and he kindly replied that he was
redoing some parts in an effort to make the code comprehendable and
maintainable.
According to him, it would be released in a few weeks.

IMHO, a static type inferencer with a c++ compiler for python would
completely change the position of python against other alternatives.
Just imagine having all the flexibility and dynamism of python with
near c speed.
Developers would start using it for problem domains that where
previously dominated by java, c++ or other static typed languages. And
all this without having to write any extension in C.
No more "python as a glue" language, or "python for quick on-time
scripts", this would stabilish it as a solid alternative for
performance critical applications (I know it's being already used for
many important projects--please don't start a flame war-- but still it
is considered by many as a language for simple things).
Mike Salib goes as far as stating than in two years, python will be
faster than C/C++.

I also have news about Ironpython. According to a comment posted by
Jim Hugunin in his new blog, he has high hopes about the combination
of static type inference and dynamic languages.

However, it is my impression that there's a little bit of distrust
about these claims (it's just my impression, I might be wrong).
I wonder what's the oppinion of the other participants of this mailing
list...