The Cost of Dynamism (was Re: Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?)

[Ned Batchelder]

On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 8:44:01 AM UTC-4, BartC wrote:
> On 21/03/2016 12:08, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 9:15:32 PM UTC-4, BartC wrote:
> >>
> >> A tokeniser along those lines in Python, with most of the bits filled
> >> in, is here:
> >>
> >> http://pastebin.com/dtM8WnFZ
> >>
> >
> > Bart, we get it: you don't like the trade-offs that Python has made.
> ...
> > You don't like Python.  Can we leave it at that?
> 
> On the contrary, I do like it. It's just a shame it's made those 
> trade-offs as a bit more speed would have made it more useful to me.
> 
> And apart from my personal opinions, if anyone else is engaged in 
> implementing any of this stuff, they might be interested in what plain 
> byte-code can achieve.
> 
> This tests highlights the benefits of an O(1) switch statement. And of 
> being able to work with integers, as Python seems to discourage that. 
> (It seems silly to have to compare strings because using ints could be 
> slower!)

You are simply reiterating (again!) the trade-offs you don't like. What
is the point?  Please stop.

--Ned.