Typing system vs. Java
michael at rcp.co.uk
Wed Aug 1 08:56:14 CEST 2001
Skip Montanaro <skip at pobox.com> wrote in
news:mailman.996593278.31833.python-list at python.org:
> Michael> Well, it's interesting to look at the byte code
> interpreter source and to consider just how much time and
> effort is spent in working out what the types of operands
> are and therefore which particular operation to invoke.
> You can't avoid that without static typing of some sort.
> Not so fast, bucko. ;-)
> The prototypical proof-by-existence is Self. Check out
Thanks for the reference; quite an intruiging looking language there. I
don't really see how this affects my point, though. I can see a number of
published papers on optimisation techniques, but most of them seem to be
about working out a static type inference regime, anyway!
> Also, who said you had to compile your code before running it? Armin
> Rego has been working on something called Psyco (Python Specializing
> Compiler) that at runtime converts VM bytecodes into another --
> partially typed -- virtual machine based upon the types of the inputs
> it sees.
Hmm. Well, with the current interpreter cost, I'm sure there's plenty of
head-room for small improvements.
The only real reference I could find for Psyco is this:
which seems recent enough to be definitive. I'm afraid that a factor of
two improvement on the existing byte code iterpreter doesn't seem very
startling to me.
More information about the Python-list