New Python implementation

[Mr Flibble]

On 14/02/2021 00:51, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On Saturday, February 13, 2021 at 7:19:58 PM UTC-5, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Mr Flibble
>> <fli... at i42.removethisbit.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
>>>> I mean - what problems the actual python compiler produce?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> I am creating neos as I need a performant scripting engine for my other major project "neoGFX" and I want to be able to support multiple popular scripting languages including Python.
>>>
>> Until you have actually produced a (mostly) compatible Python
>> implementation, can you please stop making these repeated and baseless
>> jabs at CPython's performance? You keep stating or hinting that
>> CPython is somehow unnecessarily slow, but unless you have some code
>> to back your claims, this is nothing but mudslinging.
>>
>> CPython is not as slow as you might think. And PyPy is highly
>> efficient at what it does well. Show us that you can do better than
>> these before you call them slow.
>>
>> At the absolute least, show that you have something that can run Python code.
>>
>> ChrisA
> 
> The OP has been making these claims on IRC for a while (at least two years). He has never cared to substantiate them, or even participate in a civil and detailed discussion.  He is either 1) smarter than all of us, or 2) woefully under-informed, or 3) trolling.  Our best course is to ignore him until he has code we can try.

I am sure you are most annoyed that you can't ban me from Usenet, dear, like you banned me from IRC. You need to grow the fuck up.

Your use of the words "all of us" is disingenuous, try "me" instead.  "All of us" includes people as smart as me but can't be arsed fixing the Python space because they can just about live with the status quo.

/Flibble

-- 
😎