Is python very slow compared to C

[igouy at yahoo.com]

Magnus Lycka wrote:
> Isaac Gouy wrote:
> >>I think it is wrong to call Python "very slow" just because it is slower
> >>than some other language or languages, for the same reason it would be
> >>wrong to describe the population of the UK as "very low" because 60
> >>million people is a smaller number than China or India's one billion plus.
> >>Doing so merely reinforces the premature optimizer's message that any
> >>language that isn't C (and sometimes Lisp) is "not fast enough".
> >
> > There was some context: Is python very slow compared to C?
>
> But that is a stupid context. It doesn't really tell us
> anything. Slow at what?

As I said: We can make /the missing context/ in the OP's question more
obvious...


>
> No one writes a program for the purpose of doing loops,
> comparing integers, setting up stack frames or jumping
> between instructions.
>
> The context for programming typically involves solving some
> problem or executing a function that matters to the user.
>
> It's just as database benchmarks. TPC C benchmarks tells us
> how fast a certain database is at performing TPC C benchmarks.
> Does that tell you anything about how fast it will be compared
> to competing products for your real world problem? Probably
> not. Which ever product you choose, you might end up with
> situations where a particular function is too slow. You can
> typically solve this either by changing the code or the
> configuration of the server. Sometimes you have to rethink
> your system and solve the problem in another way. Changing
> from e.g. DB2 to Oracle is unlikely to have more impact than
> these smaller changes. It's the same thing with most software
> development.
>
> >> The benchmark you pointed to are of limited use for application
> >> developers. (Their value to language designers is another story.)
> >
> > Limited use for what purpose?
>
> They are more or less useless for anyone who wants to decide
> what programming language to use in a real world situation.

Good that's more explicit.

One of the program contributors told me they do something quite similar
to fasta, k-nucleotide and reverse-complement in their real world
situation.

Isn't it possible that someone would look through The Computer Language
Shootout programs and decide that language X was unusable convoluted
gobbledegook?


> It's simply stupid to implement sorting algorithms in Python.
> It's there already. Solving Ackermann's is also rather far
> from what people typically want to achieve.

What "sorting algorithm" are you talking about?
There isn't one on http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/

Solving Ackermann's? Well if that was really the point then the
programs would be allowed to use memoization rather than simple
recursion.


> If people actually
> had the time and resources to create real software products,
> (i.e. things that take man-months to create) from the same
> spec, and developed e.g. ten programs each each ten different
> programming languages in cleanroom conditions, we'd probably
> learn something useful about the usefulness of a certain type
> of programs with certain programming languages in certain
> conditions, but only in these conditions. I'm rather certain
> that aspects such as team size, development methodology etc
> will influence the relative ratings of programs.
>
> I'm not saying that the typical toy benchmarks are completely
> useless. They might tell us things about particular language
> features that should be improved, or give us clues that a
> certain way of solving a particular problem etc, but they
> don't really help Joe Newbie Programmer who wants to write
> yet another web site toolkit.