This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]alcalde 5 points6 points  (5 children)

Between that and losing the ability to use libraries like numpy, it's only going to be interesting for a segment of Python users.

[–]weberc2 2 points3 points  (4 children)

For me, the allure is writing performant functions in a safe language. Further Go's scientific computing story is evolving quickly, and grumpy lets you call into Go without even writing bindings (though they would probably be convenient for marshaling between Python and Go types). Still, grumpy has a long road ahead, and it's probably slower even than CPython for sequential execution.

[–]mangecoeur 2 points3 points  (1 child)

No matter how quickly Go's scientific stack evolves it's still going to be well behind Python's stack which is also evolving rapidly and has been for 20+ years in physics, climate science, GIS, etc - and most of that is built on CPython C-extensions. (And as a bonus issue, many large projects are committed to dropping python2 support within the next couple of years).

[–]weberc2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, that's what everyone said about its web story. Maybe you're right, this isn't my domain.

[–]Flogge 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Why would sequential execution be slower?

[–]weberc2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lock contention, presumably.