why python is slower than java?

[Mike Meyer]

Maurice LING <mauriceling at acm.org> writes:

>>>>it is comparing versions that are YEARS out of date and use!
>>>
>>> Are the codebase of Python 1.5.2 and Java 1.1 totally replaced and
>>> deprecated?
>> For new development, yes, Python 1.5.2 has been totally replaced.
>> There
>> are legacy applications running in Python 1.5.2 that aren't worth the
>> trouble to upgrade.
>>
>>> Lisp compiler is the 1st compiler to be created (according to the
>>> Red-Dragon book, I think) and almost all others are created by
>>> bootstrapping to LISP compiler.
>> That's just silly.  It is true that LISP was one of the pioneers of
>> the
>> compiled languages, but other compilers were not written in LISP.  Almost
>> without exception, compilers were all written in assembly language until
>> Pascal came around.
>
> I'm wrong again. I suppose what I am trying to suggest is that design
> decisions made in the last may have a longer effect than what we
> consciously think. At least this is the impression I get while reading
> James Gosling's argument that Java should be object-oriented from day
> 1 (and not added onto the language, like in C++) in The Java
> Programming Environment: A white paper.

The design decisions about the syntax and grammar of the languages may
have a longer effect (thought it's not clear how much of Java can be
blamed on CPL). The design decisions about the implementation tend to
vanish every time the language is implemented, and to vanish over time
as an implementation evolves. I'd be surprised if all the 1.5.2 code
has vanished from the complete python distribution. On the other hand,
the core compiler and VM may well have been completely replaced since
then.

        <mike
-- 
Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org>			http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.