jacek.generowicz at cern.ch
Mon Sep 23 14:00:45 CEST 2002
loewis at informatik.hu-berlin.de (Martin v. Löwis) writes:
> The question is: why do you want to have a compiler? Using it is much
> more difficult than an interpreter, and more time-consuming during
> development of an application. People often expect significant speed
> increases from compilation, but it turns out that those don't
How would you reconcile the above statements in context of Common Lisp
compilers ? For example, working with the CMU Common Lisp compiler
(which, funnily enough, is called Python, and compiles to native
code), should provide a practical demonstration that your statements
are, how shall I put it ... not entirely true.
1) Compiling your code with CMUCL is no more difficult than leaving
the code uncompiled.
2) It is not more time consuming (on any significant scale - by which
I mean that a human rarely notices the time-taken-to-compile during
a normal coding-testing-debugging session).
3) Significant speed increases (wrt the uncompiled code) are usually
More information about the Python-list