What other languages use the same data model as Python?

[Benjamin Kaplan]

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:22 PM, harrismh777 <harrismh777 at charter.net> wrote:
> Hans Georg Schaathun wrote:
>>
>> It only works by assuming
>> knowledge of C, which is language which has proved unsuitable for
>> complex and abstract data modelling.
>
>   That statement is untrue; evidenced by the very fact the CPython's complex
> and abstract data modeling has been very suitably handled by C.
>   You cannot possibly mean what you have asserted... I realize there must be
> a contextual problem.  I have been handling complex data abstractions with C
> for more than 20 years... its quite well suited to the task... although, I
> am able to do my research today faster and with less lines of code in
> CPython.  That does not in any way impugn C..;. quite the contrary, given
> enough time,  C is better suited for modeling on a von Neumann processor,
> period.
>
>   Here is the thing that everyone forgets... all we have to work with is a
> von Neumann processor. (same as EDVAC, ENIAC, the VIC20, etc). Assembler is
> still the best language on that processor.  'C'  is still the best
> high-level language on that processor.  CPython is implemented in C for a
> reason:  gcc and the von Neumann processor make it a no-brainer.
>

CPython is implemented in C because that's the language chosen. Python
is also implemented in Java, C#, Python, and several other languages.
And it's not tied to the von Neumann architecture either. Only the
current implementations of it are.

>   Its silly to claim that one high-level language or another is better
> suited to complex data abstraction... don't go there.
>
>
>> Digging down into C should be unnecessary to explain Python.
>
>
>   huh?   You have to be kidding. Why do you suppose we want it to be
> open-sourced?   Use the force Luke, read the source.   If you really want to
> know how Python is working you *must* dig down into the C code which
> implements it.  The folks who document Python should be able to tell us
> enough to know how to use the language, but to really 'know' you need the
> implementation source.
>

Reading the CPython sources will show you how CPython works under the
hood, but it has nothing to do with how Python works. There are lots
of things that CPython does that "Python" does not. For instance, the
GIL is not a part of Python. Reference counting is not a part of
Python. Caching small integers and strings is not a part of Python.
Why not read the Jython sources instead of the CPython? It's the same
language, after all.