Re: Threads across programming languages

On 04/05/2024 21:04, Michael S wrote:

On Sat, 4 May 2024 00:27:53 +0100
bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
 

On 03/05/2024 16:47, Michael S wrote:

On Fri, 3 May 2024 17:20:00 +0200
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
  

Am 03.05.2024 um 17:05 schrieb Michael S:
 

A typical scenario is that you started you python program while
thinking that it wouldn't e CPU-intensive. And then it grew and
became CPU-intensive.
That's actually a good case, because it means that your program is
used and is doing something worthwhile.

>
I don't think it makes a big difference if Python has a GIL or
not since it is interpreted and extremely slow with that anyway.
 

>
64 times faster than slow wouldn't be fast, but could be acceptable.
And 64 HW threads nowadays is almost low-end server, I have one at
work, just in case.
Also, I don't see why in the future Python could not be JITted.
Javascript was also considered slow 15-20 years ago, now it's pretty
fast.
But then, my knowledge of Python is very shallow, Possibly, it's not
JITted yet because of fundamental reasons rather than due to lack of
demand.
  

>
PyPy has been around for many years.

 I see.
So, why PyPy didn't replace interpreter as a default engine?
 

There are different Python implementations, useful for different situations.  JIT is helpful if you need high performance running code and are happy to pay the time and memory resources (often very large) for doing the compilation.  But often you don't need high performance, at least not from the Python code itself, and JIT is just a waste.