Python is far from a top performer according to benchmark test...

[Terry Reedy]

"Krzysztof Stachlewski" <stach at fr.USUN.pl> wrote in message
news:btn5db$2f8$1 at absinth.dialog.net.pl...
> "Carl" <phleum_nospam at chello.se> wrote in message
> news:ryELb.238$tK2.228 at amstwist00...
> With "heavy use of Numeric module" you were calling functions
> written in C. So how can you say that Python is fast,
> when C code is doing all the work.

Well gee.  *All* of the functions exposed in builtins *and* in built-in
modules are also written in C.  So are all the methods of builtin types and
all the hidden functions (some exposed in the C API), including the
compilation and interpretation.  So how can anyone even talk about the
speed of Python, when C code is doing all the work, whether quickly or
slowly!

[and in another post]
>I just think that the Numeric package is not the best example
> of the speed of Python itself.

But what is 'Python' itself?  I think you are making a false distinction.
Numerical Python and other scientific code driving C and Fortran functions
was a, if not the killer app for Python when I learned it about 7 years
ago.  It was so important to the early success of Python, such as it was,
that the slice object was added just for its use.

Terry J. Reedy