Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?

[BartC]

On 10/03/2016 12:15, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 10/03/2016 11:50, BartC wrote:

>> Suppose you were on the development team that writes the optimising
>> stages of a C compiler. You need to test the performance of the code it
>> produces so that you can compare one optimisation with another. Would
>> you:
>>
>> (a) Test only the code that is generated by your compiler
>>
>> (b) Include also the runtime of third-party libraries consisting of
>> unknown code, written in an unknown language, with an unknown compiler
>> and with unknown optimisation settings?
>
> What has an optimising C compiler got to do with the run time speed of
> Python, which in many cases is perfectly adequate?

> I'll repeat for
> possibly the fourth time, the vast majority of people

The vast majority aren't implementing the language!

> have no interest
> in run time speed as they are fully aware that they'll be wasting their
> precious development time, as they know that their code will be waiting
> on the file, the database or the network.  What have you failed to grasp
> about that?

Tell that to the people who have been working on optimising compilers 
for the last couple of decades. Why bother making that inner loop 10% 
faster, when the program will most likely be blocked waiting for input 
anyway?

You just don't get it.

(BTW next you have have a look at the CPython source code, count how 
many times the words 'fast', 'faster' and 'fastest' occur. It obviously 
was a preoccupation with the implementers. If Python is currently fast 
enough for you, then thank those people who didn't just shrug their 
shoulders and not bother!)