Comments on: Brief side-experiments: Google Go versus Stackless Python

By: Elf Sternberg

Elf Sternberg — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:21:50 +0000

Thijs: I have to agree, and that’s disappointing. What this proves is that Stackless is a smart implementation of a single-core multiplexing piece of code, but still isn’t going to get out of that core anytime soon.

What is it with Python heading down the Hurd rathole?

By: Elf Sternberg

Elf Sternberg — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:26:43 +0000

Ten, I think the issue with Wave is that nobody can really say what it’s for, yet. Try to look at Wave from the consumer or business user’s point of view, and tell me what it does that you can’t do some other way, then tell me why I should do it the Wave way.

By: Thijs (Shenzhen)

Thijs (Shenzhen) — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:48:26 +0000

From what I read on HackerNews, it turns out that the Stackless benchmark is single-threaded. Go is probably spending quite a lot of time on managing the threads, migrating stuff or locking. Go’s implementation will become faster probably, but even then you shouldn’t compare it to Stackless. Better compare to Erlang then…

By: Brief side-experiments: Google Go versus Stackless Python | Elf … MoinMoin Wiki

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:45:01 +0000

[...] from: Brief side-experiments: Google Go versus Stackless Python | Elf … By admin | category: python | tags: computer-overclocking, filling-the-field, [...]

By: Ten

Ten — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:05:20 +0000

Man, what’s with everyone hating on Google Wave? Seriously, get over it. Wave is absolutely amazing and no, nothing has been done like wave before. To suggest there has been is complete nonsense.

As for Google’s Go! language, it’s still very, very early to really judge it’s performance against mature (or relatively mature) languages such as Python. Man oh man.. get over it. Wait for an official, stable release before jumping the damn gun!

By: Steve Howell

Steve Howell — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:03:05 +0000

Go seems like Google Wave in that it has nothing indispensible, or nothing that has been done before, but if they get it right, maybe they will at least have something that no single other tool provides. For example, Stackless Python does not provide a static typing system. Now maybe that’s a dubious advantage of Go over Stackless Python, but static typing support might matter for some people (maybe more in terms of perceived “safety” of the code than actual performance). Of course, there have been efforts during various times in Python’s history to augment Python with static typing hints…