Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
Missed a spot?
Posted Sep 2, 2008 8:17 UTC (Tue) by qg6te2 (guest, #52587)
Posted Sep 2, 2008 11:38 UTC (Tue) by MathFox (guest, #6104)
Posted Sep 2, 2008 20:09 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
So that stuff is more mature.
But simply taking Python, translate it to C++, then compile optimized binaries is a pretty damn neat trick.
What I am curious about, however, is how well shedskin works for programs that heavily use Python modules. Since Python is largely worthless, for it's current typical usage, without heavily relying on modules.
Posted Sep 5, 2008 9:18 UTC (Fri) by srepmub (subscriber, #47230)
However, I don't think this is a really big problem in many cases, because in principle you can always generate extension modules ('shedskin -e'). This way, you get a potentially massive speedup for one or more speed-critical parts, while still being able to use arbitrary Python modules and dynamic constructs in the 'main' program. And everything is still in pure Python :)
Note that I don't think Shed Skin is the ultimate solution to improve Python performance. It's a cool toy that may be useful in certain cases, but what we really need is a good JIT, something that may come out of the PyPy project.
Mark Dufour (Shed Skin main author)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds