mwh at python.net
Tue Jan 1 14:22:12 EST 2002
Paul Rubin <phr-n2001d at nightsong.com> writes:
> The thing I don't fully understand is that several Scheme
> implementations are both smaller and faster than Python.
Less dynamism, I think. I'm not sure what the standard says about
(define (func x y) (+ x y))
(set! + -)
(display (func 2 3))
but I'd bet at least some implementations would print "5". Certainly
in CL the compiler can know for certain if the + will refer to cl:+ or
not, and rebinding cl:+ is not allowed.
> I've been wondering for a while whether it's time to graft a Python
> parser onto a Scheme compiler/evaluator.
Would be an interesting project, but I'd guess that either you
wouldn't get a significant speed up, or the language you'd end up
implementing would have subtle differences from Python as we know it.
More information about the Python-list