having both dynamic and static variables

[Santoso Wijaya]

>
> Declaring the *type* of such variables is a different matter I think (and
> probably is not considered 'pythonic'; certainly it's a crude, if effective,
> way of getting extra performance).


I concur. Especially given performance is not a primary goal of Python to
begin with, and--if such a bottleneck can be located--an extension module
can be written to minimize it, anyway.

~/santa


On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:13 PM, BartC <bc at freeuk.com> wrote:

>
> "Steven D'Aprano" <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> wrote in message
> news:4d6f26a5$0$30003$c3e8da3$5496439d at news.astraweb.com...
>
>  On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 19:45:16 -0800, Yingjie Lan wrote:
>>
>>  Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Variables in Python are resolved dynamically at runtime, which comes at
>>> a performance cost. However, a lot of times we don't need that feature.
>>> Variables can be determined at compile time, which should boost up
>>> speed.
>>>
>> [...]
>>
>> This is a very promising approach taken by a number of projects.
>>
>> Cython and Pyrex are compilers that take Python-like code with static
>> type declarations and use it to produce compiled C code.
>>
>
> I got the impression the OP was talking about simply pinning down certain
> variables, so that a runtime name lookup (if that's in fact what Python
> does) was not necessary.
>
> Declaring the *type* of such variables is a different matter I think (and
> probably is not considered 'pythonic'; certainly it's a crude, if effective,
> way of getting extra performance).
>
> --
> Bartc
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20110304/067c1f90/attachment-0001.html>