On-topic: alternate Python implementations

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 16:34:17 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> wrote:
>> CLPython, an implementation of Python written in Common Lisp.
>>
>> Berp - a compiler which works by translating Python to Haskell and
>> compiling that.
> 
> Okay. WHY? CLPython gives some reason, but how often do you need to
> bridge that particular pair of languages? And why compile Python via
> Haskell, when C is available as a "high level assembly language"?

For much the same reason that PyPy uses RPython when C is available. 
Because Haskell is available as a high level non-assembly language.

Berp is based on the Glasgow Haskell Compiler, which is a modern, 
efficient, optimizing compiler capable of producing excellent quality 
machine code on Windows, Mac, Linux and many Unixes. It gives you all the 
advantages of a high-level language with high-level data structures, type 
inference, and a compiler capable of generating optimized, fast, machine 
code.

Who would want to deal with C's idiosyncrasies, low-powered explicit type 
system, difficult syntax, and core-dumps, when you could use something 
better? Apart from C programmers, of course.



-- 
Steven