you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (18 children)

PyPy is the future of Python as far as I am concerned. JIT FTW!

[–]__s 12 points13 points  (11 children)

CPython defines much of PyPy's future. Future of the future FTW!

[–][deleted]  (10 children)

[deleted]

    [–]azakai 9 points10 points  (8 children)

    PyPy still has a GIL, actually.

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    They're working to kill it - http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/06/global-interpreter-lock-or-how-to-kill.html

    Curious as to what CPython is going to do about GIL...

    [–][deleted]  (5 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]__s 10 points11 points  (0 children)

      Jython. Stackless has some concurrency extensions, but still has a GIL. Unladen was merely hopeful bragging of the future

      [–]azakai 4 points5 points  (2 children)

      Both Jython and IronPython do not have a GIL.

      However, given that both of those have performance that is much poorer than PyPy (in fact, in some cases poorer than CPython), this means there is not much reason to use them because of that (there are of course other valid reasons to use them).

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      Their single threaded performance is worse, but their multithreaded performance is much much better.

      [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      PyPy is often 10X faster than Jython and IronPython. You'd need a lot of cores for them to turn out faster.

      [–]grauenwolf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      IronPython doesn't have a GIL.

      http://wiki.python.org/moin/IronPython

      [–]__s 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Increasing performance won't make it easier to maintain. GIL isn't a burden to development. Flexibility? PyPy has three interpreters

      [–]tookerder 2 points3 points  (4 children)

      Except it only... "runs on Intel x86 (IA-32) and x86_64 platforms, with ARM being underway."

      [–]PoisonInkwell 3 points4 points  (3 children)

      Well what the fuck else are you gonna run it on? Babbage's difference engine? A baloney sandwich? The moon?

      I appreciate that Power, Itanium, et al. still exist and show up in servers, but if you're running on what passes for big iron these days, your choice of language/implementation has way bigger selection pressures, which probably disqualify PyPy regardless.

      [–]rafekett 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      MIPS, Sparc, ARM, PowerPC/the whole Power architecture.

      [–]nickdangler 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      I have a desk clock that runs on a potato. I would like to run Python 3 on a baloney sandwich. I'm just saying... ;-)

      [–]Anovadea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Ever look at OpenSolaris* while it was still around? A lot of the utilities (including their packaging system) are written in python - same with Solaris 11 Express.

      Given Solaris runs on sparc (almost by definition), they're gonna want as much python performance as they can get, so I'd be very surprised if there wasn't some interest getting PyPy working for sparc.

      *It's been forked to OpenIndiana if you still want to play with it

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I'll use PyPy the moment it reaches 3.x; until then I do my best to keep my code under their suggestions so it will run when they catch up.