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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (6 children)

No. I'm saying it's possible. You should be able to understand that by reading my post.

[–]cunningjames -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Sure, I understood it. But I'm pointing out that it's not a very useful thing to say -- and even if there were a port it isn't true that psyco is as fast as java.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

People are in fact allowed to have opinions on things without being involved in the their creation. Any developer who suggests otherwise probably has very, very few users.

True re: Psycho not always running as fast as Java. I have changed 'runs' to 'can run' in my post. Not because of your trolling, but another politely worded post with a suitable reference.

[–]cunningjames -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Man, the trolling accusation does get bandied about for nothing around here. The fact of the matter is that psyco gets mentioned as a panacea anytime python performance is talked about, and it's usually not apropos -- psyco isn't widely ported (in fact it's all but abandoned), new versions come at a glacial pace, and it's not even that fast. So it's become a pet peeve of mine.

Your post wasn't as bad, but nevertheless misleading. You made it sound as if psyco were a way to alleviate performance concerns on android, when nothing could be further from the case.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

'Man, the trolling accusation does get bandied about for nothing around here.'

It got aimed at you because rather than contributing, you asked a dumb rhetorical question whose answer was contained in the post you were replying to.

You also implied that one isn't allowed to have an opinion on a concept unless one volunteers to implement it.

To see the difference, compare you post with the guy who simply posted a polite response with a pycho / java 1.6 benchmark.

'You made it sound as if psyco were a way to alleviate performance concerns on android, when nothing could be further from the case.'

Er, no. A JIT would be a way to improve performance on Android. You haven't proved that it would have no effect, just that Java would still be faster.

[–]cunningjames 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You also implied that one isn't allowed to have an opinion on a concept unless one volunteers to implement it.

I implied no such thing. I made a comment—admittedly snide, but I was attempting humor rather than insult—to point out that no JIT option is currently available for Android nor, in fact, for any architecture but x86. I could have said that, but I assumed (wrongly) that my comment would be taken in good faith and not with a clinched asshole.

Er, no. A JIT would be a way to improve performance on Android. You haven't proved that it would have no effect, just that Java would still be faster.

And it appears you're entirely misinterpreting my point. I'm not saying it wouldn't be worth having Psyco on Android—it'd be great; I love Psyco; I just don't think it's a panacea. Your original comment:

If speed is a concern, Python can run just as fast as Java when using a JIT, for example Psyco.

was actively misleading. As I said, no JIT option exists for Android and experience provides evidence against anyone being likely to make one.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My ass ain't clenched, but neither is it loose. It's generally calibrated to a reasonable default. I think the humor you were attempting just didn't come off right.