Python is slow

[Carl Banks]

On May 23, 3:50 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno.
42.desthuilli... at websiteburo.invalid> wrote:
> Brad a écrit :
>
> > cm_gui wrote:
> >> Python is slow.
>
> > It ain't C++, but it ain't a punch card either... somewhere in between.
> > I find it suitable for lots of stuff. I use C++ when performance really
> > matters tho... right tool for the job. Learn a good interpreted language
> > (Pyhton) and a good compiled language (C or C++)
>
> LordHaveMercy(tm). Could you guys please learn what you're talking about?
>
> 1/ being interpreted or compiled (for whatever definition of these
> terms) is not a property of a language, but a property of an
> implementation of a language.
>
> 2/ actually, all known Python implementations compile to byte-code.
>
> > and you'll be just
> > fine. Until then, quit bitching.

You know, even though you're technically correct, I'd like to see you
abandon this little crusade.  At this point it's more noisy than
helpful.

Like it or not, to most of the world, "interpreted" vs. "compiled" is
a vague pragmatic distinction between fast machine-coded languages and
not-so-fast non-machine-coded languages.  And like it or not, the
world rarely cares to make the distinction between language and
implementation, and frankly, it's usually not necessary to.

What Brad said is perfectly acceptable, and good advice IMHO, under
the common usage of the terms.  I really don't see much reason to call
someone out on it unless they're being deliberately misleading.


Carl Banks