The Cost of Dynamism (was Re: Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?)
Mark Lawrence
breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk
Fri Mar 25 17:07:31 EDT 2016
On 25/03/2016 02:49, Michael Torrie wrote:
>
> I've been trying to follow things on this thread, and I understand a bit
> about Pythonic ideomatic style and I know what Python is really good at
> and some of what it's not so good at, but it seems like one of Bart's
> original contentions was that given a certain problem, coded in a
> non-pythonic way, got slower under Python 3 than it was under Python 2
> (if I recall correctly). In other words a performance regression.
> Somehow this seems to have gotten lost in the squabble over how one
> should use Python.
>
Python 3 is slower, period. The devs are trying to grab some of that
back. I'd still say that the additions in Python 3, many of which were
backported to 2.6/7, were worth this regression.
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
More information about the Python-list
mailing list