[Trilly Reign]

python is good but very slow
if only it wasn't slow as all hell it'd be perfect

You obviously don't know how to use Python then. Every Python Programmer that actually knows what he's talking about, would know

Wtf?

Python is _inherently_ slow. Even following PEP8/best practices/writing for speed produces slow experiences when comparing Python to compiled languages... Go, C, C++, Nim, etc.

Trilly Reign, you are actually the one who doesn't know what they are talking about. Python has many virtues, but speed is not one of them. Get off the Python fad wagon with saying tranquil not knowing what s/he's talking about and show me some fast code that you've written in Python.

If you can't produce it, then I recommend you take your statements back.

Edit: Also, I'll highlight the epitomized circumstance that criticizes Python's slowness. Google, a long-term advocate of Python, arguably being one of the driving forces behinds Python's historical growth, eventually hired Ken Thompson, Rob Pike and Robert Griesemer (if you don't know who they are, then I highly recommend you do for this discussion) to develop a new programming language so that Google could transition large portions of its tech stack _away_ from slower languages like Python to being faster and concurrent while maintaining similar flexibility to interpreted languages.

The language that was developed is called Go(lang), and it's largely reduced the amount of would-be Python code at Google. Google, despite its evil nature, developed a new language to address the inefficiencies of languages like Python

A little bit of research reduces ignorance.

You say I'm ignorant yet you can't open your mind to accept your wrong about this? I am well aware of all of this. Again, I provided information and an article for people to read. Infact, if you read the article I'm asking someone to disprove it doesn't state that Python isn't slow. It proves that any slowness in your program while using Python is not from Python, and just your bad programming.

But instead of reading and NOT BEING IGNORANT, I bet you read the title amd a few comments, then high holstered that ego of yours. Please step down, lol. I haven't seen such ignorance while saying don't be ignorant.

[phyrrus9]

You obviously don't know how to use Python then. Every Python Programmer that actually knows what he's talking about, would know

Wtf?

Python is _inherently_ slow. Even following PEP8/best practices/writing for speed produces slow experiences when comparing Python to compiled languages... Go, C, C++, Nim, etc.

Trilly Reign, you are actually the one who doesn't know what they are talking about. Python has many virtues, but speed is not one of them. Get off the Python fad wagon with saying tranquil not knowing what s/he's talking about and show me some fast code that you've written in Python.

If you can't produce it, then I recommend you take your statements back.

Edit: Also, I'll highlight the epitomized circumstance that criticizes Python's slowness. Google, a long-term advocate of Python, arguably being one of the driving forces behinds Python's historical growth, eventually hired Ken Thompson, Rob Pike and Robert Griesemer (if you don't know who they are, then I highly recommend you do for this discussion) to develop a new programming language so that Google could transition large portions of its tech stack _away_ from slower languages like Python to being faster and concurrent while maintaining similar flexibility to interpreted languages.

The language that was developed is called Go(lang), and it's largely reduced the amount of would-be Python code at Google. Google, despite its evil nature, developed a new language to address the inefficiencies of languages like Python

A little bit of research reduces ignorance.

You say I'm ignorant yet you can't open your mind to accept your wrong about this? I am well aware of all of this. Again, I provided information and an article for people to read. Infact, if you read the article I'm asking someone to disprove it doesn't state that Python isn't slow. It proves that any slowness in your program while using Python is not from Python, and just your bad programming.

But instead of reading and NOT BEING IGNORANT, I bet you read the title amd a few comments, then high holstered that ego of yours. Please step down, lol. I haven't seen such ignorance while saying don't be ignorant.

First of all, comparing ANY scripting language to a programming language will result in the scripting language being substantially slow.
When it comes to scripting languages, due to the very large overhead in python's execution, it's also quite a bit slower than other scripting languages like ruby, bash, and perl.
So the logic is correct that a scripting language (inherently substantially slow) that's noticeably slower than other scripting languages would be considered extremely slow.

Don't start flame wars over your preferred script style, it's not worth it (a good way to get banned)

[skeeba]

It proves that any slowness in your program while using Python is not from Python, and just your bad programming.

The easiest way to disprove this with proof is by using the NumPy Python package, which is used for mathematical computations. It is *exceptionally* popular.

And guess what... The mathematical computing is done in C, which is compiled as a library and used as part of the Python package. If Python _wasn't_ slow, then the package wouldn't require C. If Python's slowness _only_ came from the skills of the programmer, then surely a handful of thousands/tens of thousands/hundreds of thousands of Python developers using NumPy would have transitioned the package away from C... But the spoiler is this: NumPy _is only popular_ due to its efficiency of 1) mathematical computing, and 2) ability to _not_ be slow.

NumPy would never be popular if it was fully implemented in Python. And the NumPy core contributors/original authors know this, and this is why Python uses C, as a result of _Python being slow_.

But instead of reading and NOT BEING IGNORANT, I bet you read the title amd a few comments, then high holstered that ego of yours. Please step down, lol. I haven't seen such ignorance while saying don't be ignorant.

I actually read the Q/A thread*** (not an article), and I found some points valid and some points invalid. If your crutch is that you think Python is only slow due to the coder's abilities to write _good_ Python, then you have completely glossed over many core computer science fundamentals, and _this_ is where your disconnect is.

I do not have an ego about Python; I actually like the language. I use Python at work, and have made a handful of FOSS projects with it. I enjoy Python, but _it is *extremely* slow_ when compared to other languages. Python _is not slow_ because of the developer, Python is slow because it is uses an interpreted environment with garbage collection and other high-level mechanisms. Yes, Python can be improved _a bit_ (for the love of God, switch to a modern versions and use f-strings), but it can only be improved so much.

Also, if you want to do some research into the Cython language, you'll find something new to chew on (that you may actually find interesting _and_ compelling). Code as you wish, though; the best study is one that uses only a single sample.

[phyrrus9]

It proves that any slowness in your program while using Python is not from Python, and just your bad programming.

The easiest way to disprove this with proof is by using the NumPy Python package, which is used for mathematical computations. It is *exceptionally* popular.

And guess what... The mathematical computing is done in C, which is compiled as a library and used as part of the Python package. If Python _wasn't_ slow, then the package wouldn't require C. If Python's slowness _only_ came from the skills of the programmer, then surely a handful of thousands/tens of thousands/hundreds of thousands of Python developers using NumPy would have transitioned the package away from C... But the spoiler is this: NumPy _is only popular_ due to its efficiency of 1) mathematical computing, and 2) ability to _not_ be slow.

NumPy would never be popular if it was fully implemented in Python. And the NumPy core contributors/original authors know this, and this is why Python uses C, as a result of _Python being slow_.

But instead of reading and NOT BEING IGNORANT, I bet you read the title amd a few comments, then high holstered that ego of yours. Please step down, lol. I haven't seen such ignorance while saying don't be ignorant.

I actually read the Q/A thread*** (not an article), and I found some points valid and some points invalid. If your crutch is that you think Python is only slow due to the coder's abilities to write _good_ Python, then you have completely glossed over many core computer science fundamentals, and _this_ is where your disconnect is.

I do not have an ego about Python; I actually like the language. I use Python at work, and have made a handful of FOSS projects with it. I enjoy Python, but _it is *extremely* slow_ when compared to other languages. Python _is not slow_ because of the developer, Python is slow because it is uses an interpreted environment with garbage collection and other high-level mechanisms. Yes, Python can be improved _a bit_ (for the love of God, switch to a modern versions and use f-strings), but it can only be improved so much.

Also, if you want to do some research into the Cython language, you'll find something new to chew on (that you may actually find interesting _and_ compelling). Code as you wish, though; the best study is one that uses only a single sample.

as for the first paragraph, that's a stupid argument. It doesn't require C, it was written in C. There's a huge difference between the two. Odds are the library was written for something else and simply adapted to also have python bindings.

Python is slow because it is uses an interpreted environment with garbage collection and other high-level mechanisms

exactly this. Every programming language ultimately makes its way down to machine code. Languages like C and Go compile it down to machine/asm, optimize that, then assemble it. Languages like python are supported by a large runtime (in machine code) that's pre-programmed to do x when it sees y. This is inherently slower.

[skeeba]

as for the first paragraph, that's a stupid argument. It doesn't require C, it was written in C. There's a huge difference between the two. Odds are the library was written for something else and simply adapted to also have python bindings.

I never said NumPy *required* C, but that C was specifically chosen due to its efficiency.

Edit:

Odds are the library was written for something else

Also, out of curiosity: was the C code for NumPy not specifically written for the Python package? Or was it adopted? Either way, the argument still stands that the choice to use (or keep) C is the right decision. Gotta' love C.

[Drako]

What is this flame war. This looks like two little countries shitting on each other (@"skeeba" @"Trilly Reign"), and then America trying to step in (@"phyrrus9").

[Dismas]

Python is excellent. That said, it is a high-level language and should normally be used as such. Can totally understand why employers would find it valuable.

[skeeba]

What is this flame war. This looks like two little countries shitting on each other (@"skeeba" @"Trilly Reign"), and then America trying to step in (@"phyrrus9").

I agree with @Oni that Python is excellent. That said, Python _is_ slow. It's _fast enough_ for many tasks, but when compared to resource intensive computation... There's a reason why people still use C, C++, Rust, Golang, Nim, D, Zig. Clinging onto the idea Python is only slow due to a coder's inability to write _proper_ Python code shows a lack of understanding of how computers work. And yeah, hearing that bothers me.

[kingzlatan]

python is more flexible for data science and ai. everything else java