Discussion:
Python is slow
(too old to reply)
Luis M. González
2008-12-12 14:04:39 UTC
Permalink
Creating a fast implementation of a dynamic language is almost rocket
science. But it has been done. There is Stronghold,
I meant of course Strongtalk...
Blah, blah, blah...
Why don't you guys google a little bit to know what's being done to
address python's "slowness"??
It has been mentioned in this thread the pypy project (isn't it enough
for you??)
Other hints: shedskin, psyco, pyrex...
Tim Chase
2008-12-10 19:33:19 UTC
Permalink
[nibbling a little flame-bait]
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
http://www2.ljworld.com/
I'm not sure I'm seeing what you're seeing -- the dynamic page
loaded in under 2 seconds -- about on par with sun.com,
python.org, php.net or msn.com all being pulled from non-cached
servers. You sure you're not mistaking your bandwidth and/or
browser-rendering slowness for Python-as-a-web-server slowness?


Would it be nice if Python was faster? Sure, why not?

Does it meet my needs speed-wise? 99% of the time, yes. With
Psyco, 99.9% of the time. As has been shown repeatedly over the
last couple months, algorithm-choice makes a far greater impact
than some python tweaks. Most of my time spent waiting is
usually on I/O (disk, network, or user). And those times I've
experienced slowness where I'm not waiting on I/O, it's always
been an algorithm aspect (an O(N**2) fuzzy comparison algorithm
is my prime offender). A faster Python might shave a 30-60
seconds off a 10 minute run, but it's still a walk around the
office either way.
Python is slow. Very slow.
However until you have a use-case that *you* have implemented
with *real code*, publicly vetted the algorithm, and THEN find it
slow as demonstrated by profiled timings, I'm afraid it's all
just unsubstantiated hot air to say categorically that "python is
slow". It might be "too slow to do some particular CPU-intensive
task", but it's repeatedly proven quite sufficient for a wide
variety of development needs.

-tkc
cm_gui
2008-12-22 18:42:49 UTC
Permalink
In article <mailman.5967.1229898197.3487.python-l... at python.org>,
In case anyone is not aware, Python is
also used for heavy scientific computational
problems, games such as Civilisation and
others, and I believe (correct me if I"m wrong)
it's also used by NASA.
--JamesMills
i am referring mainly to Python for web applications.

Python is slow.
Python has become very popular in scientific computation. ?You'll find
it in use lots of places (universities, national labs, defense labs). ?I
use it for solving partial differential equations for quantum chaos
calculations and went to C for speed up where needed using ctypes which
is very straightforward and plays nice with numpy array/matrix
libraries. ?I've been doing scientific programming for 30 years. ?Python
with C extensions and libraries is the best approach I've ever used. ?
Calculation speed is not a problem and the code can be "tweaked" to
increase it easily. ?Programming speed is incredible. ?I can get
substantial object oriented code up and running much faster than
anything I've ever used.
--
-- Lou Pecora
Luis M. González
2008-12-22 20:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Python is slow.
Haven't you said that already?
Well, you did it so many times that you convinced me...

I'll tell the Google folks that they are a bunch of ignorant fools for
choosing python.
That's why their business is doing that bad. They will surely go to
hell.
This Google search engine and that silly site "youtube"... they won't
work.
THEY ARE SLOW!
James Mills
2008-12-22 22:27:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by cm_gui
i am referring mainly to Python for web applications.
Python is slow.
Please just go away. You are making
an embarrassment of yourself.

--JamesMills
MRAB
2008-12-12 15:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luis M. González
Why don't you guys google a little bit to know what's being done to
address python's "slowness"??
Nothing is being done, and woth Py3k it got even worse.
Post by Luis M. González
It has been mentioned in this thread the pypy project (isn't it enough
for you??)
Other hints: shedskin, psyco, pyrex...
None of those projects addresses inefficacies in the CPython
interpreter, except for psyco - which died of an overdose PyPy.
PyPy is interesting if they ever will be able to produce something
useful. They have yet to prove that. Even if PyPy can come up with a
Python JIT, they will still be decades behind the technologies of
Strongtalk and Java. That is the problem with reinventing the wheel
all over again.
Not to forget LLVM and Parrot which also will support Python
frontends.
Python is developed and maintained by volunteers. If you'd like to have
a go at writing a JIT interpreter for it, then go ahead. No-one here
will stop you.
Luis M. González
2008-12-21 17:52:48 UTC
Permalink
RTFM, use as much python code and optimize with C where needed,
problem solved!
That's true if your *really* need C's extra speed.
Most of the times, a better algorithm or psyco (or shedskin) can help
without having to use any other language.
This is unless you are hacking a kernel, writing device drivers or 3D
image processing.
For anything else, python is fast enough if you know how to optimize
your code.

Luis
r
2008-12-21 18:47:21 UTC
Permalink
Could not have said it better myself Luis, i stay as far away from C
as i can. But there are usage cases for it.
Lou Pecora
2008-12-22 14:51:01 UTC
Permalink
In article <mailman.5967.1229898197.3487.python-list at python.org>,
In case anyone is not aware, Python is
also used for heavy scientific computational
problems, games such as Civilisation and
others, and I believe (correct me if I"m wrong)
it's also used by NASA.
--JamesMills
Python has become very popular in scientific computation. You'll find
it in use lots of places (universities, national labs, defense labs). I
use it for solving partial differential equations for quantum chaos
calculations and went to C for speed up where needed using ctypes which
is very straightforward and plays nice with numpy array/matrix
libraries. I've been doing scientific programming for 30 years. Python
with C extensions and libraries is the best approach I've ever used.
Calculation speed is not a problem and the code can be "tweaked" to
increase it easily. Programming speed is incredible. I can get
substantial object oriented code up and running much faster than
anything I've ever used.
--
-- Lou Pecora
James Mills
2008-12-21 22:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by r
Could not have said it better myself Luis, i stay as far away from C
as i can. But there are usage cases for it.
If you can think of 1 typical common case
I'll reward you with praise! :)

By the way, by common and typical I mean
use-cases that you'd typically find in every
day applications and user tools, software,
games, etc.

In case anyone is not aware, Python is
also used for heavy scientific computational
problems, games such as Civilisation and
others, and I believe (correct me if I"m wrong)
it's also used by NASA.

--JamesMills
James Mills
2008-12-15 05:00:33 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:59 PM, James Mills
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Benjamin Kaplan
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Obviously not enough to get to the point where it's cheaper to have the
programmers write C code. And the hardware is more for handling the intense
traffic that YouTube gets, not for speeding up the site.
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.
And I should clarify that by stating
that the CPython interpreter is NOT slow.

--JamesMills
Stefan Behnel
2008-12-12 15:06:39 UTC
Permalink
How is the numpy support in Cython going? It was supposed to know
about ndarrays natively.
It does.
I.e. not treat them as Python objects, but
rather as known C structs. That way an operation like arr[n] would not
result in a callback to Python, but translate directly to fast pointer
arithmetics.
http://docs.cython.org/docs/numpy_tutorial.html

Stefan
James Mills
2008-12-11 03:17:20 UTC
Permalink
@em_gui: You are outrightly wrong.

Why ? Python's VM is not slow! In fact it's quite fast.
What does tend to be slow is sloppy poorly designed
code. Django/Turbogears (sorry for any devs reading this)
are large frameworks with a lot of complexity - and yes
they tend to be a little cumbersome and slow.

CherryPy (1) on the other hand is quite fast, but it is not
your kitchen-sink type framework as Django and Turbogears
tends to be.

Before you start making such ridiculous stupid claims
about the performance of Python's VM and Python itself
actually do some work, do some tests, show us some of
your work ?

And RYI, I'm the author of a (fairly) general purpose
event driven library (framework) with a focus on Component
architectures. This is called circuits (2). As well as being
an event-driven library which performs really really well,
it also has "Web Components" (circuits.lib.web) that make
CherryPy look too hard to use and ~4x slower. Yes circuits
on decent hardware performs (raw speeds) of ~3000 req/s.
I have used circuits to build commercial web applications
for clients in conjunction with ExtJS (3) and loading time
for the entire app is usually ~1-2s. Data response times
are usually in the order of 50-100ms.

SLow ? I don't think so.

--JamesMils

References:
1. http://www.cherrypy.org/
2. http://trac.softcircuit.com.au/circuits/
3. http://www.extjs.com/
You guys are living in denial.
Python is SLOW, especially for web apps.
Instead of getting mad, why don't get together and come up with a
faster VM/interpreter?
The emperor doesn't like to be told he is not wearing any clothes?
You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!
And when I say Wrong, I mean WRONG!!!
And I am not saying that you are confussed.
I say that you are WRONG!
And when someone says so many times that you are wrong, it is because
you are WRONG!
And don't say that you are not wrong, because you are wrong!
You are Wrong. Very Wrong.
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don't say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn't be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
--
--
-- "Problems are solved by method"
Jeremiah Dodds
2008-12-11 07:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Does anybody else think it's really funny when people argue over which
language used for _web apps_ is fastest? I mean, I'm not aware of any
language that's slow enough to make it noticeable compared to say, network
latency or database access. I guess you might notice if you're not caching
any content, and your language of choice is _really_ bad at generating
strings in a for loop.

As far as "slow" goes, the clear winner(?) is Ruby, and there are _plenty_
of sites written in ruby that aren't slow. The ones that are slow aren't
slow because of ruby - they're slow primarily because of people not knowing
how to write a database schema, as far as I can tell.

There seems to be a lot of stigma against python as being a "slow" language,
which I suppose it is when measured in certain ways - however it's more than
fast enough for me, and is certainly fast enough for web-apps (I run a few
sites on top of CherryPy, and have _never_ had an issue with them, even with
a minor redditing on one of them).

I had a freelance gig once porting an image-manipulation algorithm from C++
to python. It was a horrible mess of C++ code, but ran very fast (and did
exactly what my employer needed it to do). Porting it to python in a literal
led to (IIRC) a 10x speed-down. Changing that to more idiomatic python made
it only 3-5x slower than the C++. After translating that into, I think,
PyRex, it was barely slower than the original code. Certainly well within
the "acceptable" range.

When I did the above, I was really pretty new to python. If I did the same
job again, I'd probably get better results, just from understanding the
language better. But I digress.

The only places that I'm aware of where performance would be enough of an
issue to make Python a poor choice are places where using python would
_never_ be considered anyhow.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20081211/0e811d63/attachment.html>
r
2008-12-21 17:34:41 UTC
Permalink
RTFM, use as much python code and optimize with C where needed,
problem solved!
James Mills
2008-12-16 22:47:32 UTC
Permalink
What kind of performance problem have you find in python that makes
you so unhappy?
What are you going to do with all the extra speed provided by c++ (a
Hello World! ?)...
Still no reply from cm_gui, he must have googled "C hello world" :D
I must be mad for doing this - but I feel so strongly
about this topic. In 99.9% of cases generally things
are "feast enough"! So here goes:

jmills at atomant:~$ cat - > hello.c
int main (int argc, char ** argv) {
printf("Hello World!\n!");
}
jmills at atomant:~$ tcc hello.c -o hello
jmills at atomant:~$ wc -l hello.c
3 hello.c
jmills at atomant:~$ ls -l hello.c
-rw-r--r-- 1 jmills jmills 69 2008-12-17 08:41 hello.c
jmills at atomant:~$ ls -l hello
-rwxr-xr-x 1 jmills jmills 2972 2008-12-17 08:41 hello

jmills at atomant:~$ time ./hello
Hello World!
!
real 0m0.003s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.004s

jmills at atomant:~$ cat - > hello.py
print "Hello World!"

jmills at atomant:~$ time python hello.py
Hello World!

real 0m0.129s
user 0m0.016s
sys 0m0.020s

OMG OMG OMG! Python is slower!
If you compare "sys" times ~5x slower!

BUT ... This is in fact a misleading as most of
this is in the startup time. So let's be fairer:

jmills at atomant:~$ time python -E -S hello.py
Hello World!

real 0m0.011s
user 0m0.008s
sys 0m0.004s

Wow! Only ~2x as slow as C.

--JamesMills

PS: Yet another useless post!
cm_gui
2008-12-10 23:39:01 UTC
Permalink
You guys are living in denial.
Python is SLOW, especially for web apps.

Instead of getting mad, why don't get together and come up with a
faster VM/interpreter?

The emperor doesn't like to be told he is not wearing any clothes?
You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!
And when I say Wrong, I mean WRONG!!!
And I am not saying that you are confussed.
I say that you are WRONG!
And when someone says so many times that you are wrong, it is because
you are WRONG!
And don't say that you are not wrong, because you are wrong!
You are Wrong. Very Wrong.
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. ? ?And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. ? Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
acerimusdux
2008-12-11 02:33:51 UTC
Permalink
You guys are living in denial.
Python is SLOW, especially for web apps.
Instead of getting mad, why don't get together and come up with a
faster VM/interpreter?
The emperor doesn't like to be told he is not wearing any clothes?
O
The one in denial is the one without any evidence to back his
assertions. as someone once said, "In God we Trust. All others must have
data."

For example, the most recent benchmarks from The Computer Language
Benchmark Game:

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=al
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all

On Gentoo on a Pentium 4 for example:

mean
07.10 Python Psyco
19.34 Lua
23.00 Python
28.27 Perl
30.00 PHP
66.28 Javascript SpiderMonkey
75.12 Ruby

I have no idea about Zope, but if that's slow, go complain to the
devlopers of Zope. The Python interpreter is one of the fastest for a
dynamically interpreted language. And Psyco is competitive with many
other JIT compilers. I would think someone who has been obsessing about
the speed of Python since May, and especially interested in a Python
"VM" would have learned by now about Psyco?
sturlamolden
2008-12-13 20:35:41 UTC
Permalink
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. ? Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
Benjamin Kaplan
2008-12-15 04:44:37 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Obviously not enough to get to the point where it's cheaper to have the
programmers write C code. And the hardware is more for handling the intense
traffic that YouTube gets, not for speeding up the site.
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20081214/ffbc7b6c/attachment.html>
MRAB
2008-12-21 16:33:30 UTC
Permalink
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.
haha, getting hostile?
python fans sure are a nasty crowd.
Python is SLOW.
when i have the time, i will elaborate on this.
You are not fast enough to elaborate on Python's slowness!? :-)
cm_gui is slow!
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
Correction:

cm_gui is SLOW! :-)
Krishnakant
2008-12-21 17:20:05 UTC
Permalink
With my current experience with java, python and perl, I can only
suggest one thing to who ever feels that python or any language is slow.
By the way there is only one language with is fastest and that is
assembly.
And with regards to python, I am writing pritty heavy duty applications
right now.
Just to mention I am totally blind and I use a screen reader called orca
on the gnome desktop. I hope readers here can understand that a screen
reader has to do a lot of real-time information processing and respond
with lightenning speed.
And Orca the scree reader is coded totally in python.
So that is one example.
So conclusion is is how you enhance your program by utilising the best
aspects of python.
happy hacking.
Krishnakant.
Post by MRAB
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.
haha, getting hostile?
python fans sure are a nasty crowd.
Python is SLOW.
when i have the time, i will elaborate on this.
You are not fast enough to elaborate on Python's slowness!? :-)
cm_gui is slow!
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
cm_gui is SLOW! :-)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
James Mills
2008-12-15 04:59:45 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Benjamin Kaplan
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Obviously not enough to get to the point where it's cheaper to have the
programmers write C code. And the hardware is more for handling the intense
traffic that YouTube gets, not for speeding up the site.
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.

--JamesMills
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
2008-12-21 09:49:36 UTC
Permalink
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.
haha, getting hostile?
python fans sure are a nasty crowd.
Python is SLOW.
when i have the time, i will elaborate on this.
You are not fast enough to elaborate on Python's slowness!? :-)

cm_gui is slow!

Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
cm_gui
2008-12-20 22:18:40 UTC
Permalink
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.
--JamesMills
haha, getting hostile?
python fans sure are a nasty crowd.

Python is SLOW.

when i have the time, i will elaborate on this.
Steve Holden
2008-12-20 22:34:16 UTC
Permalink
Seriously cm_gui, you're a fool.
Python is not slow.
--JamesMills
haha, getting hostile?
python fans sure are a nasty crowd.
Python is SLOW.
Two lies in one posting!
when i have the time, i will elaborate on this.
Save your time, go somewhere else. Nobody here is interested.

regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
George Sakkis
2008-12-15 15:34:01 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
Buddy, just stop whining and go with c++ if it makes you happy.
By the way, what's the blazingly fast application you need to write so
desperately?
What kind of performance problem have you find in python that makes
you so unhappy?
What are you going to do with all the extra speed provided by c++ (a
Hello World! ?)...
Folks, do you *really* feel the urge to feed this troll and his 8-year-
old "arguments" again and again ? Please think twice before hitting
send on this pointless thread.
Benjamin Kaplan
2008-12-13 21:13:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by sturlamolden
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don't say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn't be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
And there's also a web crawler written in Python, used by a site called
Google, that's so slow that the search engine gives very few results.
Post by sturlamolden
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20081213/6fb23b7d/attachment.html>
Stef Mientki
2008-12-16 23:02:56 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
Buddy, just stop whining and go with c++ if it makes you happy.
By the way, what's the blazingly fast application you need to write so
desperately?
What kind of performance problem have you find in python that makes
you so unhappy?
What are you going to do with all the extra speed provided by c++ (a
Hello World! ?)...
Still no reply from cm_gui, he must have googled "C hello world" :D
or cm_gui is slow,
btw I thought r was a statistic package ;-)
cheers,
Stef
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Luis M. González
2008-12-15 13:15:30 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
Buddy, just stop whining and go with c++ if it makes you happy.
By the way, what's the blazingly fast application you need to write so
desperately?
What kind of performance problem have you find in python that makes
you so unhappy?
What are you going to do with all the extra speed provided by c++ (a
Hello World! ?)...
r
2008-12-16 22:24:23 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
Buddy, just stop whining and go with c++ if it makes you happy.
By the way, what's the blazingly fast application you need to write so
desperately?
What kind of performance problem have you find in python that makes
you so unhappy?
What are you going to do with all the extra speed provided by c++ (a
Hello World! ?)...
Still no reply from cm_gui, he must have googled "C hello world" :D
r
2008-12-16 23:08:32 UTC
Permalink
What about all the crap you had to go through just to get output?
Python wins

PS. cm_gui try this piece of code
print 'hello world'.replace('world', 'idiot')
James Mills
2008-12-16 23:47:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by r
What about all the crap you had to go through just to get output?
Python wins
Yes I can't say I really enjoy writing C (at all!)
_except_ in the case where I may need to
optimise some heavy computation. But then
again with multi-core CPUs these days and
cheap hardware, distributed processing is
not only easy, but very effective! And I still
wouldn't resort to C because well umm
psyco is just awesome!

--JamesMills
r
2008-12-17 00:27:11 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 16, 5:47?pm, "James Mills" <prolo... at shortcircuit.net.au>
Post by James Mills
Post by r
What about all the crap you had to go through just to get output?
Python wins
Yes I can't say I really enjoy writing C (at all!)
_except_ in the case where I may need to
optimise some heavy computation. But then
again with multi-core CPUs these days and
cheap hardware, distributed processing is
not only easy, but very effective! And I still
wouldn't resort to C because well umm
psyco is just awesome!
--JamesMills
This idiot(cm_gui) just needs to RTFM before going off on tirades like
a 3 year old. What i find so funny is after Luis asked "what's the
blazingly fast application you need to write so desperately?" we have
yet to hear from this "expert programmer". He is probably still trying
to get "hello world" to compile.
cm_gui
2008-12-15 04:38:58 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
James Mills
2008-12-15 08:35:58 UTC
Permalink
So to summarize, Python is fast enough for even demanding stuff, and
when done correctly even number crunching or binary parsing huge files
or possible in competitive speeds. But you sometime need a developer
that can wield the tool with a certain experience, and not a stupid
rookie that whines that his tool does not make his O(n**n) algorithm
automatically blazing fast.
Amen! +10

--JamesMills
Andreas Kostyrka
2008-12-15 07:26:16 UTC
Permalink
Am Sun, 14 Dec 2008 20:38:58 -0800 (PST)
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
yeah, as they do for basically all big sites, no matter what language
is used for implementation.

Next is the fact that it's rather simple with Python to meet speed
demands where external factors like Gb vs 10Gb network cards are the
limiting factor.

And last, you do realize that most "simple" websites do hinge on the
performance and scalability of the underlying SQL server. In practice
some languages like PHP do force that "LAMP" model much stronger on the
developer, which makes developing systems that scale beyond a certain
point a challenge.

So to summarize, Python is fast enough for even demanding stuff, and
when done correctly even number crunching or binary parsing huge files
or possible in competitive speeds. But you sometime need a developer
that can wield the tool with a certain experience, and not a stupid
rookie that whines that his tool does not make his O(n**n) algorithm
automatically blazing fast.

Andreas
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com.
In fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Craig Allen
2008-12-16 20:44:59 UTC
Permalink
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to
make
youtube.com fast???
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
less than they'd spend to implement it in C
Steven D'Aprano
2008-12-15 08:15:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by sturlamolden
By the way... I know of a very slow Python site called YouTube.com. In
fact, it is so slow that nobody ever uses it.
hahaha, do you know how much money they are spending on hardware to make
youtube.com fast???
Oooh, I know!

ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!!!

And still cheaper and easier than re-writing YouTube's infrastructure in
another language.
--
Steven
Bruno Desthuilliers
2008-12-10 19:23:49 UTC
Permalink
cm_gui a ?crit :

(snip FUD)

see also:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_frm/thread/5cea684680f63c82

by the same troll^M^M^M^M^Msmart guy.
RadicalEd
2008-12-17 14:51:50 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. ? ?And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. ? Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
I did a DataBase consult with MySQLdb and PHP with 300000 rows and who
you think was the better and faster, YES, Python for almost 10
seconds, and I have to configure the php.ini for PHP could show me the
DATA.
He is just a futile troll frustrated with Python.
Stef Mientki
2008-12-10 20:04:12 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-a-faster-python-vm.html
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Put this guy in the junk filter,
in may of this year he (or it) started the same discussion.
Stef
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
2008-12-10 20:22:38 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:04:12 +0100
Post by Stef Mientki
[...]
Put this guy in the junk filter,
What's the point if people like you are just going to repost his entire
message like that?
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy at druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
Tomasz Rola
2008-12-16 03:16:06 UTC
Permalink
In the next years people that use low-level languages like C may need
to invent a new language fitter for multi-core CPUs, able to be used
on GPUs too (see the OpenCL), less error-prone than C, able to use the
CPU vector instructions efficiently. (The D language is probably unfit
for this purpose, because even if it's meant to be a system language,
I don't think it can be used much to replace C everywhere it's used
now.) A C+ maybe? :-)
Bye,
bearophile
I would say, this probably will be some descendant of Erlang and/or
Haskell. As evolutionary step, they look very promising to me, they just
are "not quite there" yet. As of C++, I cannot tell before I read their
new standard.

Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
** **
** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com **
Bruno Desthuilliers
2008-12-12 19:41:57 UTC
Permalink
sturlamolden a ?crit :
(snip)
Creating a fast implementation of a dynamic language is almost rocket
science. But it has been done. There is Stronghold, the fastest
version of Smalltalk known to man, on which the Sun Java VM is based.
On a recent benchmark Java 6 -server beats C compiled by GCC 4.2.3
cf bearophile's comment on this point (CPU architecture and RAM)
And
most of that magic comes from an implementation of a dynamically typed
language (Smalltalk).
Err... Where is _Java_ "dynamic" actually ? A benchmark of _Smalltalk_
VM vs CPython VM would make more sense.
Second, there are other fast implementations of dynamic languages. The
CMUCL and SBCL versions of Common Lisp comes to min; you can see how
SBCL does in the same benchmark (CMUCL tends to be even faster).
Could it be that there are some type hints in the lisp versions of the
source code ?
So Python is a lot slower than it needs to be.
Please fix it, you're welcome.
Isaac Gouy
2008-12-13 15:18:28 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 12, 11:41?am, Bruno Desthuilliers
Post by Bruno Desthuilliers
(snip)
Creating a fast implementation of a dynamic language is almost rocket
science. But it has been done. There is Stronghold, the fastest
version of Smalltalk known to man, on which the Sun Java VM is based.
On a recent benchmark Java 6 -server beats C compiled by GCC 4.2.3
cf bearophile's comment on this point (CPU architecture and RAM)
And
most of that magic comes from an implementation of a dynamically typed
language (Smalltalk).
Err... Where is _Java_ "dynamic" actually ? A benchmark of _Smalltalk_
VM vs CPython VM would make more sense.
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=vw&lang2=python
Post by Bruno Desthuilliers
Second, there are other fast implementations of dynamic languages. The
CMUCL and SBCL versions of Common Lisp comes to min; you can see how
SBCL does in the same benchmark (CMUCL tends to be even faster).
Could it be that there are some type hints in the lisp versions of the
source code ?
So Python is a lot slower than it needs to be.
Please fix it, you're welcome.
Giampaolo Rodola'
2008-12-11 23:22:53 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
Now seriously, just to finish your idiotic rant, check the Pypy
http://codespeak.net/pypyhttp://morepypy.blogspot.com
And if you still think this is not enough, why don't you help these
guys to make it faster?
Luis- Nascondi testo citato
- Mostra testo citato -
The real (and still unsolved) problem with PyPy is the installation
which requires something like a dozen of third-party packages to be
installed.
Unfortunately it seems there are no plans yet for releasing any
Windows/Linux/Mac installer in the near future.


--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib/
Marco Mariani
2008-12-12 09:28:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Giampaolo Rodola'
The real (and still unsolved) problem with PyPy is the installation
which requires something like a dozen of third-party packages to be
installed.
Unfortunately it seems there are no plans yet for releasing any
Windows/Linux/Mac installer in the near future.
I'm not using it, but at least Ubuntu 8.10 has the .deb packages of pypy
1.0. And I remember installing a release last year in a few minutes,
during a conference talk.
sturlamolden
2008-12-12 13:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Creating a fast implementation of a dynamic language is almost rocket
science. But it has been done. There is Stronghold,
I meant of course Strongtalk...
Andreas Kostyrka
2008-12-12 17:18:33 UTC
Permalink
None of those projects addresses inefficacies in the CPython
interpreter, except for psyco - which died of an overdose PyPy.
Bullshit. All that discussion about performance forgets that performance is a function of the whole system, not the language.

Worse you can measure it really badly.

E.g. it's relative simple to compare CPython versus IronPython versus Jython. For a given benchmark program.

As programs do not trivially translate from language A to language B, nor does fluency in language A make you automatically fluent in
language B after learning the syntax.
PyPy is interesting if they ever will be able to produce something
useful. They have yet to prove that. Even if PyPy can come up with a
Python JIT, they will still be decades behind the technologies of
Strongtalk and Java. That is the problem with reinventing the wheel
all over again.
Well, it's reinventing the wheel. The problem that Java is a different kind of wheel
(boxed vs. unboxed objects, plus more static compile time bindings), Smalltalk is also different (e.g. multiple inheritence),
so you need to have a specific toolbox for the wheel, sorry. Keeping and enhancing the tribal wisdom
about toolbox design is what a subtribe of the Computer Scientists do.

Btw, Psyco is not a JIT like most JVMs had them, it's a specializing compiler. JVM JITs traditionally speeded up the unboxed data
type operations. Psyco does something comparable, but it has to specialize first on data types. The end effect is similiar, but the
background of what happens is quite different.
Not to forget LLVM and Parrot which also will support Python
frontends.
When they do, they'll do. There have flown quite a bit of Python version since the time that it was announced that
Parrot will have a Python frontend.

Andreas
MRAB
2008-12-11 03:51:10 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Carl Banks <pavlovevidence at gmail.com
On Dec 10, 12:42 pm, cm_gui <cmg... at gmail.com
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
cm_gui is TROLL. And I am not compring it with bots like Aaron
Castironpi Brody. cm_gui is even troller than Xah Lee!
actually Castironpi has made some coherent replies lately. Xah Lee is
worse than ever though.
Perhaps there's a Law of Conservation of Trolling. :-)
David Cournapeau
2008-12-12 14:27:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luis M. González
It has been mentioned in this thread the pypy project (isn't it enough
for you??)
Since pypy can't be used today for most production use (most python
packages can't work on it), I don't see how it could be enough for
anyone interested in solving problems today. I want faster function
calls to use with numpy: do you know of any solution ? Pypy certainly
isn't, at least today.

cheers,

David
Luis M. González
2008-12-12 17:36:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luis M. González
Why don't you guys google a little bit to know what's being done to
address python's "slowness"??
Nothing is being done, and woth Py3k it got even worse.
Post by Luis M. González
It has been mentioned in this thread the pypy project (isn't it enough
for you??)
Other hints: shedskin, psyco, pyrex...
None of those projects addresses inefficacies in the CPython
interpreter, except for psyco - which died of an overdose PyPy.
PyPy is interesting if they ever will be able to produce something
useful. They have yet to prove that. Even if PyPy can come up with a
Python JIT, they will still be decades behind the technologies of
Strongtalk and Java. That is the problem with reinventing the wheel
all over again.
Not to forget LLVM and Parrot which also will support Python
frontends.
So, what's your conclusion?
Isaac Gouy
2008-12-13 15:17:00 UTC
Permalink
On a recent benchmark Java 6 -server beats C compiled by GCC 4.2.3 And
most of that magic comes from an implementation of a dynamically typed
language (Smalltalk). [...]
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32q/benchmark.php?test=all?=all
That is indeed a nice result, JavaVM has come a long way from the
first one used for applets. That result comes mostly from the fact
that this is a test on a 4-core CPU, that is less easy to manage from
C. You can see that in the single 64-bit core tests:http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?test=all?=all
Whether or not it's less easy to manage from C is unclear, but you are
correct to point out few of those C programs have been updated to
exploit quadcore - so the reasonable comparison is with C++.


And the benchmarks game also provides x86 measurements with programs
forced onto a single core which shows GCC ahead

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all
And take a look at the memory used too, up to 34 times higher for the
JVM on the 4-core CPU.
In the next years people that use low-level languages like C may need
to invent a new language fitter for multi-core CPUs, able to be used
on GPUs too (see the OpenCL), less error-prone than C, able to use the
CPU vector instructions efficiently. (The D language is probably unfit
for this purpose, because even if it's meant to be a system language,
I don't think it can be used much to replace C everywhere it's used
now.) A C+ maybe? :-)
I agree that CPython may quite enjoy having something built-in like
Psyco, but it's a lot of work for an open source project. Probably
with 1/3 or 1/2 of the work poured on PyPy you may create that
improvement for CPython. Maybe PyPy will someday produce some fruit,
but I think they have used the wrong strategy: instead of trying to
create something very new that someday will work, it's often better to
try to improve something that today everybody uses, AND try to be
useful from almost the very beginning.
Bye,
bearophile
sturlamolden
2008-12-12 14:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Cournapeau
I want faster function
calls to use with numpy: do you know of any solution ? Pypy certainly
isn't, at least today.
An interesting thing for numpy would be to use CUDA. If we can move
floating point ops to the GPU, a common desktop computer could yield
teraflops. A subclass of ndarray could be written for the nvidia GPU.

Using OpenMP within NumPy would also be interesting. There are desktop
computers available today with two quadcore processors.

There is multiprocessing, which works nicely with numpy. You can even
have multiple processes working on ndarrys that point to the same
shared memory. Just allocate a multiprocessing.Array and use its
buffer to create ndarray views.
Stefan Behnel
2008-12-12 14:43:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Cournapeau
I want faster function
calls to use with numpy: do you know of any solution ?
http://cython.org/

Stefan
sturlamolden
2008-12-12 14:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Behnel
http://cython.org/
How is the numpy support in Cython going? It was supposed to know
about ndarrays natively. I.e. not treat them as Python objects, but
rather as known C structs. That way an operation like arr[n] would not
result in a callback to Python, but translate directly to fast pointer
arithmetics.
Benjamin Kaplan
2008-12-10 19:29:25 UTC
Permalink
Python is slow. Very slow.
And... ? Was there a question or specific suggestion in there
somewhere?
Do you go to your mechanic and say "My car wont go as fast as the
other cars on the road! They should make it faster!"?
Good luck to you in your futile, uh I meant, *future* endeavors. (No
wait, I really meant "futile".)
-- Paul
Don't bother arguing. It's just a pathetic attempt to start a flame war.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20081210/4cf19395/attachment.html>
Paul McGuire
2008-12-10 19:07:01 UTC
Permalink
Python is slow. Very slow.
And... ? Was there a question or specific suggestion in there
somewhere?

Do you go to your mechanic and say "My car wont go as fast as the
other cars on the road! They should make it faster!"?

Good luck to you in your futile, uh I meant, *future* endeavors. (No
wait, I really meant "futile".)

-- Paul
Benjamin Kaplan
2008-12-11 03:32:31 UTC
Permalink
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
cm_gui is TROLL. And I am not compring it with bots like Aaron
Castironpi Brody. cm_gui is even troller than Xah Lee!
actually Castironpi has made some coherent replies lately. Xah Lee is worse
than ever though.
Carl Banks
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20081210/3a83dd5a/attachment.html>
cm_gui
2008-12-10 18:42:40 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-a-faster-python-vm.html

I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?

Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!

Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:
http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!

And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.

Python is slow. Very slow.
bearophileHUGS
2008-12-12 14:58:39 UTC
Permalink
On a recent benchmark Java 6 -server beats C compiled by GCC 4.2.3 And
most of that magic comes from an implementation of a dynamically typed
language (Smalltalk). [...]
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32q/benchmark.php?test=all?=all
That is indeed a nice result, JavaVM has come a long way from the
first one used for applets. That result comes mostly from the fact
that this is a test on a 4-core CPU, that is less easy to manage from
C. You can see that in the single 64-bit core tests:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all
And take a look at the memory used too, up to 34 times higher for the
JVM on the 4-core CPU.

In the next years people that use low-level languages like C may need
to invent a new language fitter for multi-core CPUs, able to be used
on GPUs too (see the OpenCL), less error-prone than C, able to use the
CPU vector instructions efficiently. (The D language is probably unfit
for this purpose, because even if it's meant to be a system language,
I don't think it can be used much to replace C everywhere it's used
now.) A C+ maybe? :-)

I agree that CPython may quite enjoy having something built-in like
Psyco, but it's a lot of work for an open source project. Probably
with 1/3 or 1/2 of the work poured on PyPy you may create that
improvement for CPython. Maybe PyPy will someday produce some fruit,
but I think they have used the wrong strategy: instead of trying to
create something very new that someday will work, it's often better to
try to improve something that today everybody uses, AND try to be
useful from almost the very beginning.

Bye,
bearophile
Duncan Booth
2008-12-10 19:43:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Chase
[nibbling a little flame-bait]
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
http://www2.ljworld.com/
I'm not sure I'm seeing what you're seeing -- the dynamic page
loaded in under 2 seconds -- about on par with sun.com,
python.org, php.net or msn.com all being pulled from non-cached
servers. You sure you're not mistaking your bandwidth and/or
browser-rendering slowness for Python-as-a-web-server slowness?
For another example try http://www.novell.com. That's a Plone site which
gets a lot of visitors and isn't noticeably slow.
Luis M. González
2008-12-11 12:06:19 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. ? ?And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. ? Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
Now seriously, just to finish your idiotic rant, check the Pypy
project:

http://codespeak.net/pypy
http://morepypy.blogspot.com

And if you still think this is not enough, why don't you help these
guys to make it faster?

Luis
jay.dow
2008-12-11 15:53:32 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
Now seriously, just to finish your idiotic rant, check the Pypy
http://codespeak.net/pypyhttp://morepypy.blogspot.com
And if you still think this is not enough, why don't you help these
guys to make it faster?
Luis
PyPy looks pretty sweet. I'm glad this discussion was started. There
always seems to be this buzz about python being slow. So what if it's
not as fast as C? I make that up by cutting down development time. I
figured if I ever ran into something being too slow, that I'd just
have to learn c extensions and replace the bottle necks. In 2007 I
wrote a system in python that communicated to an autopilot on an
autonomously flying aircraft at real-time. We never had any speed
issues. I have not played with django much and I do not typically
develop web apps, but the slowness really must be bloated algorithms
in the libraries you are using. Programming in other languages (java,
c, c++, c# etc) is not an issue for me, but next to python it's like
writing with a feather and ink instead of a ball point pen. I have to
put more time into working with the tools I'm using than actually
getting the job done.
Luis M. González
2008-12-10 22:48:49 UTC
Permalink
You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!
And when I say Wrong, I mean WRONG!!!

And I am not saying that you are confussed.
I say that you are WRONG!

And when someone says so many times that you are wrong, it is because
you are WRONG!
And don't say that you are not wrong, because you are wrong!

You are Wrong. Very Wrong.
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. ? ?And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. ? Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
Jason Scheirer
2008-12-10 19:32:00 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
Python is SLOW. ? ?And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
An example is:http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. ? Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
Python is slow. Very slow.
I have two responses, and could not decide which one to post. Then I
figured I could just do both.

--

Response 1:

You have stumbled on to our plot! We use Python because we hate
getting things done and love nothing more than waiting for things to
complete, because that means more time to drink coffee. Python is a
hoax pushed on the world by the Vast Conspiracy Of People Who Actually
Never Get Anything Done But Enjoy Watching Things Scroll By Very
Slowly While Drinking Coffee.

--

Response 2:

Are you new to Python and frustrated with it? Is that where this is
coming from? If so, I am sorry that Python is so hard.

You can use Jython and get the Java VM or IronPython and get the CLR
VM. There's an immediate fix there for your objections to the CPython
VM. You could investigate getting some higher performance code going
using Stackless. Or move to event-based coding in Twisted and avoid
lots of while loop spins and locking/threading mischief and the other
things that come with network-bound programming like web development.
The PyPy project is also writing a fast Python intepreter with
multiple code output options. Or you can also profile your existing
code and optimize. Or integrate NumPy and Psyco into your efforts. And
you have the advantage of writing C extensions where it makes sense if
you're using CPython -- it's relatively easy and has resulted in fewer
than a dozen fatalities over the course of its existence. There are
options galore here, and 'Python' is actually a large, diverse
ecosystem. Web development is one thing Python does, but is not its
specialized purpose. PHP is a collection of tragic mistakes that
masquerades as a scripting language for the web.

I'd like to see some data on the response times of sites running
various Python web frameworks against each other and versus sites in
other languages. I'm also curious about the perception of speed versus
actual speed here -- if a site pushes 125k of page data a second at a
constant rate or pushes it all in 125k chunks in one second intervals,
the first is going to 'feel' faster initially even though both will
finish transferring the data at the same time and have identical page
load times. And if you're dealing with massive amounts of static
content (javascript frameworks, css, etc) that only needs to go over
the wire one then yeah, the page is going to be slow ON FIRST LOAD but
from then on have 90% of what it needs in local cache, so subsequent
page loads will be smaller and faster. That appears to be the case
with ljworld, at least.
sturlamolden
2008-12-12 13:29:15 UTC
Permalink
cm_gui is TROLL. And I am not compring it with bots like Aaron
Castironpi Brody. cm_gui is even troller than Xah Lee!
Sure he is a troll, but he also have a point. Python is slower than it
needs to be.

Creating a fast implementation of a dynamic language is almost rocket
science. But it has been done. There is Stronghold, the fastest
version of Smalltalk known to man, on which the Sun Java VM is based.
On a recent benchmark Java 6 -server beats C compiled by GCC 4.2.3 And
most of that magic comes from an implementation of a dynamically typed
language (Smalltalk). A Python interpreter based on Strontalk would be
interesting...

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all

Second, there are other fast implementations of dynamic languages. The
CMUCL and SBCL versions of Common Lisp comes to min; you can see how
SBCL does in the same benchmark (CMUCL tends to be even faster).

So Python is a lot slower than it needs to be. But in most cases,
perceived 'slowness' comes from bad programming.

http://www.strongtalk.org/
Carl Banks
2008-12-11 03:25:41 UTC
Permalink
Python is SLOW. ? ?And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
cm_gui is TROLL. And I am not compring it with bots like Aaron
Castironpi Brody. cm_gui is even troller than Xah Lee!


Carl Banks
Thorsten Kampe
2008-12-10 19:30:32 UTC
Permalink
* cm_gui (Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:42:40 -0800 (PST))>
Python is SLOW. And I am not comparing it with compiled languages
like C.
Python is even slower than PHP!
Sure. But Perl is faster than Ruby (exactly 2.53 times as fast). And
Python is 1.525 times faster than VisualBasic (or was it the other way
round?).
Just go to any Python website and you will know.
http://www2.ljworld.com/
And this site is created by the creators of Django!
Quite slow, indeed! Django is even slower than Python itself...
And it is not just this Python site that is slow. There are many many
Python sites which are very slow. And please don?t say that it could
be the web hosting or the server which is slow ? because when so many
Python sites are slower than PHP sites, it couldn?t be the web
hosting. Also, Zope/Plone is even slower.
I hope this will awaken the community. I did a quick test and it seems
that Zope is slower than Python but Python is faster than Plone and PHP
is faster than even Perl and Python _together_...!

Thanks for the heads-up, cm_gui!

Thorsten
George Sakkis
2008-12-10 19:51:51 UTC
Permalink
http://blog.kowalczyk.info/blog/2008/07/05/why-google-should-sponsor-...
I fully agree with Krzysztof Kowalczyk .
Can't they build a faster VM for Python since they love the language
so much?
WTF is Krzysztof Kowalczyk and why should we care ?

Thanks for playing, the exit for the trolls is right down the hall.
Arnaud Delobelle
2008-12-10 21:59:13 UTC
Permalink
cm_gui <cmgui2 at gmail.com> writes:

[stuff]
Python is slow. Very slow.
The same troll started this same flame earlier this year:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/5cea684680f63c82?q=
--
Arnaud
Christian Heimes
2008-12-12 15:55:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luis M. González
Why don't you guys google a little bit to know what's being done to
address python's "slowness"??
Nothing is being done, and woth Py3k it got even worse.
Indeed, it *is* slower for now. As I already said in another thread our
top priorities were feature completeness and bug fixing. Optimizations
will follow the features in the near future.

Christian
sturlamolden
2008-12-12 14:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luis M. González
Why don't you guys google a little bit to know what's being done to
address python's "slowness"??
Nothing is being done, and woth Py3k it got even worse.
Post by Luis M. González
It has been mentioned in this thread the pypy project (isn't it enough
for you??)
Other hints: shedskin, psyco, pyrex...
None of those projects addresses inefficacies in the CPython
interpreter, except for psyco - which died of an overdose PyPy.

PyPy is interesting if they ever will be able to produce something
useful. They have yet to prove that. Even if PyPy can come up with a
Python JIT, they will still be decades behind the technologies of
Strongtalk and Java. That is the problem with reinventing the wheel
all over again.

Not to forget LLVM and Parrot which also will support Python
frontends.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...