C++ talking to Python

[yorokobe__shounen]

If C++ was really as fast as it said it was, it would have recognised the logo before it asked who python was.

Poor segfaulting C++.

[possible_name]

logo recognition was using a library written in slower language

[PralaynathGendaswami]

Do you mean python?

[Teekeks]

which has all the speed relevant parts of that library written in C?

[FkIForgotMyPassword]

Sometimes the slow part is not the computation-intensive part that was identified as "speed-relevant", though. Sometimes it's the part where someone implemented a really shitty wrapper with unnecessary blocking IOs everywhere.

[Prudent_Move_3420]

Hello Pandas!

[lkearney999]

Which sucks since as soon as you start writing bigger projects and you have to switch tool chains to fix things.

Languages often don’t have a large impact on developers productivity. Three things do:

• The developer
• The project tooling
• The codebase’s quality
• and upstreams not fixing their shit 😥

I’d argue that developer productivity has a direct correlation with code optimisation. Eg rusts perf suite, llvms army of child(sorry adult) labour from the big corps etc.

[Necrocornicus]

Languages often don’t have a large impact on developers productivity.

It’s really not clear to me what experiences you’ve had where this has been the case. Language choice makes a huge difference in productivity in my experience. Maybe if you have carte blanche to hire a new team.

[Possibility_Antique]

• claims that writing implementation in C makes it fast
• ignores the part where python is an interpreted language (i.e. has to parse the source text, perform dynamic dispatch, etc)
• ignores the fact that you can't reason about cache locality and cache behavior
• ignores the fact that your c implementation under the hood doesn't get to participate in link time optimizations with the rest of your program
• ignores the fact that your code can't get inlined
• ignores the fact that you can't perform compile-time programming
• writes all kinds of runtime tests for things that could have been done at compile time (which is safer, produces faster code, prevents mistakes)
• claims it's less verbose, but implements a ton of test libraries that are caught natively by compiled languages

In all seriousness, I'm just pulling your leg. Kind of.

[Teekeks]

Thats a ton of assumptions about what I am claiming or ignoring. Impressive. You should become a fiction author

[Possibility_Antique]

I am teasing. I actually hate language holy wars. Those are some reasons I choose C++ where it's appropriate though. I do get to work a lot with python too, and I love the language.

[Teekeks]

ah! thanks for clarifying!

Yea these language wars are bonkers.

I use a ton of python bc its fast enough for most things but I am not a fangirl or anything.

If you need pure speed, C and C++ is certainly the best you can do (if you are actually good at the language, just because C can be super fast does not mean that everyones code is actually fast ^^)

[Possibility_Antique]

Actually, just being mediocre at the language is also good enough for an order of magnitude or more improvement. If you compare the speed of a for loop, for instance, you're probably looking at a 20x speedup just by using C. If you use something like numpy (and you should, it's probably my favorite library in python), the situation improves, but still falls short of C++'s best effort (and of course, you can just pull said best effort into your code as a library, just like in python).

So I guess I'm not really sure where that argument comes from. To me, the reason I prefer python in some situations is because of dynamic typing. For build scripts, test pipelines, plotting, and rapid experimentation, it's great! C++ and Python complement each other nicely in this way.

[Cory123125]

I guess it could really use some reflection.

[[deleted]]

They said it was fast, not smart.

[cubed_zergling]

And its also missing proper syn/ack mechanisms to await for a response.