Python un-plugging the Interpreter

[Alex Martelli]

John Nagle <nagle at animats.com> wrote:
   ...
> >>>Perhaps the current wave of dual-core and quad-core CPUs in cheap
> >>>consumer products would change people's perceptions -- I wonder...
> 
> > IronPython would appear to be coming along nicely and getting acceptance
> > in the Windows community, and I believe the underlying dotNet CLR does
> > do threads nicely; we'll see what develops on that front, I guess.
> 
>      Thus we now have a demonstration that Python implementations need
> not be as slow as CPython.  And that Microsoft is beating open source
> on Python.

Not yet -- overall, CPython is still faster than IronPython in a vast
majority of cases.  Also, according to
<http://www.codeplex.com/Project/License.aspx?ProjectName=IronPython>: 
"""
You may use the Software for any commercial or noncommercial purpose,
including distributing derivative works
    ...
This license has not been submitted to OSI, but it allows developers to
take full advantage of a dynamic language on the CLR and to have the
freedom to distribute their works for the benefit of the community at
large. The license is half of a page long and very straight forward. We
believe it stands up to what developers demand of an "open" license.
"""
I.e., they're claiming that, while not OSI-approved, theirs _IS_ in
essence an open-source license.


>      Python as a language is in good shape.  But the CPython
> implementation is holding back progress.   What we need are better
> and faster implementations of the language we've got.

That's not what Guido thinks -- he thinks we first need a better version
of the language (Python 3000), simplified by removing much of the stuff
that's been hanging around forever for backwards compatibility (and with
a few other enhancements, check the Py3k PEPs).  As long as the
volunteers who work on Python prefer to follow Guido's leadership rather
than yours, it's going to be difficult to force them to do what _you_
think is most important, rather than what _he_ thinks is.


>      PyPy, ShedSkin, and Jython all were steps in the right
> direction, but none had enough momentum to make it.
> Jython hasn't had a release since 2002, ShedSkin is basically
> one guy, and the EU pulled the plug on PyPy.
> 
>      Now what?

If you can get enough people to agree with you, and those people have
either technical nous and spare time, or some money and the willingness
to invest it in funding a new Python implementation (presumably building
on top of PyPy's excellent final deliverables), you can get a team
together for the purpose.  Or, if you're really enthusiastic about
IronPython, you could look into supporting Mono
(<http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page>) to make it ever better, and a
faster platform for running IronPython-compiled applications than
Microsoft's own proprietary CLR (and also modify IronPython as you
require, given the above-mentioned license).

Other possible alternative starting points include pirate (the Python
compiler for the Parrot virtual machine) -- I don't believe it's
currently under active development (no more than, say, Jython), but I
might well be wrong on this issue; and "Python dialects" ranging from
Pyrex to Boo.


Alex