Re:The CPython Bytecode Compiler Is Dumb
by vlovich123 on Monday February 25, 2019 @08:29AM
(#19245439)
I fail to see how what you said is relevant. All you've said is that Python & C/C++'s memory models are different from each other, which yes they are & no one has stated otherwise. My interpretation of the claims made were:
1. Python doesn't have thread-local variables
2. Python's memory model around threading is what prevents any optimization.
Both are clearly incorrect. For example, take Java. You have the same behaviour as Python: your VM won't crash & your code won't even generate a panic. Java clearly has thread-local variables & an optimizing compiler.
Python's inhibition around optimizing is partially around the guarantees they make around APIs that do self introspection but mainly around keeping the interpreter simple. For a counterpoint see PyPy, Cython, JPython, IronPython etc which optimize Python just fine. They mostly trip over module extensions being tied directly to the non-standardized CPython module API & that API is tied intimately to implementation decisions of CPython.
1. Python doesn't have thread-local variables 2. Python's memory model around threading is what prevents any optimization.
Both are clearly incorrect. For example, take Java. You have the same behaviour as Python: your VM won't crash & your code won't even generate a panic. Java clearly has thread-local variables & an optimizing compiler.
Python's inhibition around optimizing is partially around the guarantees they make around APIs that do self introspection but mainly around keeping the interpreter simple. For a counterpoint see PyPy, Cython, JPython, IronPython etc which optimize Python just fine. They mostly trip over module extensions being tied directly to the non-standardized CPython module API & that API is tied intimately to implementation decisions of CPython.