What are the kinds of software that are not advisable to be developed using Python?

Chris Angelico rosuav at gmail.com
Tue Feb 11 05:59:40 CET 2014


On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 3:21 PM, CM <cmpython at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, February 8, 2014 10:43:47 PM UTC-5, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> PyPy can generate code which is comparable to compiled C in speed.
>> Perhaps you mean, "if execution speed is the most important thing, using
>> a naive Python interpreter may not be fast enough".
>
> Given that the OP seems to be new enough to Python to not know what it is
> not as good for, my guess is that PyPy may not yet be "ready enough" to
> serve some/most of his needs. For example, if he wanted to write a GUI
> app, AFAIK he is, for now, limited to Tkinter and a constrained section of
> wxPython, and wxPython is dicey.  I tend to see things through a desktop GUI
> application lens, so maybe this is just my bias.  And I hope I am wrong. I
> am in no way trying to slight the PyPy efforts.
>
> Maybe he could somehow write the GUI part with CPython and the speed-critical
> parts with PyPy but I don't know if that is possible.  (Is it?)

More likely, he can write the whole thing in Python, and then run it
in CPython. Then see if its speed is good enough. Sometimes "good
enough" means "finishes executing in less than 100ms after user
interaction". Sometimes it's even more generous. Other times it's "can
handle at least X requests per second on a single CPU core", where X
is defined based on the number of requests that the network can
handle. If it meets that requirement, there's no reason to go to any
sort of effort to improve performance. And that's how it is for huge
HUGE numbers of Python scripts.

Of course, if performance _is_ a problem, then the next step is to
measure and find out exactly what's the slow bit. It's seldom what you
first think of.

ChrisA



More information about the Python-list mailing list