Python is far from a top performer according to benchmark test...
tjreedy at udel.edu
Sat Jan 10 05:03:00 CET 2004
"Krzysztof Stachlewski" <stach at fr.USUN.pl> wrote in message
news:btn5db$2f8$1 at absinth.dialog.net.pl...
> "Carl" <phleum_nospam at chello.se> wrote in message
> news:ryELb.238$tK2.228 at amstwist00...
> With "heavy use of Numeric module" you were calling functions
> written in C. So how can you say that Python is fast,
> when C code is doing all the work.
Well gee. *All* of the functions exposed in builtins *and* in built-in
modules are also written in C. So are all the methods of builtin types and
all the hidden functions (some exposed in the C API), including the
compilation and interpretation. So how can anyone even talk about the
speed of Python, when C code is doing all the work, whether quickly or
[and in another post]
>I just think that the Numeric package is not the best example
> of the speed of Python itself.
But what is 'Python' itself? I think you are making a false distinction.
Numerical Python and other scientific code driving C and Fortran functions
was a, if not the killer app for Python when I learned it about 7 years
ago. It was so important to the early success of Python, such as it was,
that the slice object was added just for its use.
Terry J. Reedy
More information about the Python-list