OpenEuphoria

Re: Py Update

• Posted by David Cuny <dcuny at LANSET.COM> Oct 21, 2000
• 652 views

=A9koda wrote:


> This Py language can't be a serious project?

Oh?

> Cause you would have to write it in C not Euphoria
> for the sake of speed.

There are quite a few languages written in "high level" languages that ru=
n
just fine. Squeak, for example. With processor speeds as high as they are=
,
it's getting harder and harder to accept that premise.

> So I'm assuming you are writing it ... why?

Well, I compared the Queens demo program written in Euphoria and Py.
Benchmarks on my machine look something like:

   Interpreted Py: 18 seconds
   Bound Py: 12 seconds
   Compiled Py: 7 seconds
   Interpreted Euphoria: 2 seconds
   Compiled Euphoria: 2 seconds

By the way, I'd be careful about comparing the benchmark programs that co=
me
with Euphoria to Py - they tend to use operations which are optimized to
specific data types, and Py only uses objects.

> Why don't you write a preprocessor (upgrade existing).

I'd written a preprocessor for Euphoria some time back. An interpreter is=
 a
lot more flexible. For example, implementing a 'continue' statement is
difficult to do in a pre-processor. You can also do a lot more 'meta' typ=
e
stuff, like finding out what sort of variables are in a module, what
variable values are, evaluting statements, create variables dynamically...
the kind of stuff that Kat keeps asking for.

> It would make much more sense and it would be useful
> for some real programs.

I'm not convinced that my approach is a bad thing. I reserve the right to
change my mind, though.

> It would be very interesting to have our own language
> similar to Euphoria with source code available.

Peuphoria, which is in 'pure' C. The source code is available, and Menno =
has
been working on fixing the remaining bugs.

-- David Cuny