Is this make sence? Dynamic assembler for python

[DivX]

On 20 lip, 02:52, Steven D'Aprano <st... at REMOVE-THIS-
cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:36:57 -0700, DivX wrote:
> > On 19 lip, 21:18, geremy condra <debat... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 11:53 AM, DivX <sem.r... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I found on the forum some discussion about crypting text and one guy
> >> > did make assembly implementation of crypting algorithm. He
> >> > dynamically generates mashine code and call that from python. Here
> >> > are impressive
> >> > resultshttp://www.daniweb.com/code/snippet216632-5.html
>
> >> > Is this better approach then writing extensions in c?
>
> >> No, xor cipher is not suitable for general purpose encryption, and what
> >> do you need the speed for? xor is almost certainly not going to be the
> >> bottleneck in your application.
>
> >> Geremy Condra
>
> > Just asking if this approach is good for example quicksort algoriths or
> > some kind of sorting algorithms, or simulations but the point is of
> > mixing python and assembler?
>
> Ask yourself, why aren't programs written in assembly if it's so good?
>
> (1) It's platform dependent. Do you really need a separate program for
> every single hardware platform you want to run Quicksort on?
>
> (2) Writing assembler is hard, really hard. And even harder to debug.
>
> (3) Modern C compilers can produce better (faster, more efficient)
> machine code than the best assembly code written by hand.
>
> Honestly, this question has been resolved twenty years ago -- thirty
> years ago, maybe there was still a good point in writing general purpose
> code in assembly, but now? It's just showing off. Unless you're writing
> hardware specific code (e.g. device drivers) it is pointless, in my
> opinion.
>
> I think that mixing assembly and python is a gimmick of very little
> practical significance. If you really need the extra performance, check
> out PyPy, Cython, Pyrex and Psyco.
>
> --
> Steven

I can agree with you about most of the arguments, but why he continues
to developing it. What he sees and we do not see?
If you're interested I found a link http://www.tahir007.com/