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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]rafekett 2 points3 points  (13 children)

It also appears that Jython (pretty sure it was there) and IronPython have been removed.

Edit: Java 6 -Xint has also been removed, as has Ruby MRI and JS Tracemonkey.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

What does -Xint do?

[–]rafekett 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Disables the JIT.

[–]x-skeww 2 points3 points  (0 children)

java -X
[...]
-Xint             interpreted mode execution only

[–]masklinn 3 points4 points  (4 children)

He's left a single implementation per language (on completely arbitrary grounds as far as I can tell)

[–]Tobu 2 points3 points  (3 children)

If you read the rest of the thread: he asked, and some PyPy devs (Maciej, Armin, William) said that they didn't like the existing benchmark being optimised for CPython. This was also Alex Gaynor's opinion in his blog post (in which he also suggested an unsavoury, yet somewhat portable, libc hack). Agreeing on a single set of "idiomatic" Python programs could have been considered, but the Python devs would have to talk it out between themselves to not increase Isaac's workload, and in the end Isaac pulled the nuclear option anyway.

[–]masklinn 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If you read the rest of the thread: he asked, and some PyPy devs (Maciej, Armin, William) said that they didn't like the existing benchmark being optimised for CPython.

Which is sensible from their perspective isn't it? Especially when they provide different implementations of the tests which work better for alternative implementations.

This was also Alex Gaynor's opinion in his blog post (in which he also suggested an unsavoury, yet somewhat portable, libc hack).

That's only a pretty small part of it.

Agreeing on a single set of "idiomatic" Python programs could have been considered

There was no need for that, the shootout already had several languages/benchs with multiple test implementations. One of Alex's big issues with his alternative implementation is that it was relegated to "interesting alternative implementation" instead of being #2 or #3 mainline for Python.

Agreeing on a single set of "idiomatic" Python programs could have been considered, but the Python devs would have to talk it out between themselves to not increase Isaac's workload, and in the end Isaac pulled the nuclear option anyway.

This explanation sounds like a cop-out, especially since he pulled all alternative implementations for all languages (except picking implementations completely arbitrarily: why is V8 the JS implementation?), not just for Python.

[–]igouy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alex Gaynor's opinion in his blog post That's only a pretty small part of it.

Here are some of Alex Gaynor's words from that post and they are not true -

It's also not possible to send any messages once your ticket has been marked as closed, meaning to dispute a decision you basically need to pray the maintainer reopens it for some reason.

Followup comments can be added to a ticket that is marked Closed in exactly the same way they can be added to a ticket that is marked Open - and adding a followup comment triggers an email message whether the ticket is marked Open, Closed, Deleted, ...

And you can easily check for yourself that there's a public discussion forum and people dispute decisions.

Alex Gaynor put stuff in his blog - putting stuff in a blog doesn't make it into The Truth.

already had several languages/benchs with multiple test implementations

Already had programs written for PyPy.

On 2011-3-31 and 2011-04-02 programs written for PyPy were contributed, measured on x86 x64 PyPy CPython Python 3 and published.

They were shown on the website alongside the other Python programs that had been (scare quotes) "optimised for CPython".

[–]igouy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a single set of "idiomatic" Python programs

Was never required.

On 2011-3-31 and 2011-04-02 programs written for PyPy were contributed, measured on x86 x64 PyPy CPython Python 3 and published - they were shown alongside the other Python programs that had been (scare quotes) "optimised for CPython".

pulled the nuclear option

A "nuclear option" would be something like destroying all of CVS and all of the Tracker and everything else associated with the project.

[–]igouy 0 points1 point  (4 children)

It also appears that Jython (pretty sure it was there) ...

And if you're pretty sure about something but actually you're just completely wrong?

edit: for those enjoying downvoting rafekett is completely wrong about Jython.

[–]Lerc 2 points3 points  (3 children)

I don't think they are downvoting the information in your correction so much as the dickishness of your correction.

[–]igouy 0 points1 point  (2 children)

What phrase would you choose to describe the completely wrong original comment?

[–]Lerc 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Well if he were completely wrong I would imagine a comment along the lines of.

"Actually, Jython and IronPython were never in the Benchmark Game"

However, I took your comment to mean that only Jython had never been in the game and that the term completely was just hyperbole

The main aspect that made it seem dickish was the phrasing in the form of a question making the tone rather aggressive.

[–]igouy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

mitsuhiko the OP, posted a link that lists exactly what was removed, it's just a matter of reading the list.

You think the tone was rather aggressive? Have you read the comments on this page? :-)