Python future performance and speed

Jeremy Bowers jerf at
Mon Aug 23 05:00:14 CEST 2004

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:50:21 -0700, Neuruss wrote:

>> Statements like that serve only to demonstrate the narrowness of
>> thought of the writer.
> Excuse me?
> It seems that you're missing the point. 

With respect, I think it is you who are not understanding the objections
people are having to your writing. 

It is not this part that people are objecting:

> But you can't deny that
> for some problem domains, it is slow. Very slow.

It is this:

> but speed is critical

And bordering on the offensive to some people is this:

> and this is were all efforts should be concentrated.

as Python is an open-source and volunteer based this can be interpreted as
a command on how people should spend their freely offered time.

(In other words, all of *what* efforts? Are you helping to speed up Python
at all, or is this just rather strongly worded "suggestions" to other
people? Not a friendly approach.)

> So my intention when I started this thread, was to learn more about
> these projects, read other oppinions, get some news, etc... I didn't
> mean to start a a nonsense discussion!

Referring to other people's opinions as "nonsense" is also not a path to a
productive discussion, especially when the prime criterion for
"nonsensicalness" seems to be "an opinion different then mine".

(For one, many people at many times, not just in this thread, have
observed that "speed" is a meaningless term without a context, and that
Python is fast enough for many, many contexts. Repeated assertion that
there exist contexts where Python isn't fast enough does nothing to
disprove that point. If you don't understand why that is logically true, I
suggest thinking about it for a bit before replying yet again that there
exist contexts where Python isn't fast enough.)

More information about the Python-list mailing list