A story about Python... sort of
roy at panix.com
Mon Jul 7 20:41:32 CEST 2003
Dave Brueck <dave at pythonapocrypha.com> wrote:
> True, although rather than let the frame rate continue up the game designers
> will simply add more polygons, more actors, more textures, greater viewable
> distance, etc. so they won't ever reach the "fast enough" point either.
On the other hand, much of that low-level rendering stuff is done in
hardware (and more and more every day). The application running on
the main CPU is less and less of a factor. To a certain extent, the
question is not Python vs. C++, but ATI vs. Nvidia, and how well the
app takes advantage of the underlying hardware.
The same is true in a lot of domains. Modern network switches
implement all of the critical-path logic in hardware, and (for the
most part) all the software does is provide a management/configuration
interface. It's not unusual for a switch to be running at or near
capacity, and the CPU usage to be 10% or less. In a situation like
that, it just doesn't matter how fast the software is. Time to market
and robustness are much more important.
More information about the Python-list