72
Why Is Python So Popular in 2025? (blog.jetbrains.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 1 year ago (10 children)

It is far more then that. It is a full up programming language.

I never understand why people think compilation is a barrier. But sure most python is not compiled.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    If compilation takes more than a few single-digit seconds, IME, it breaks the development flow when you're working on small fixes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Having worked on large C++ projects, the solution to this issue is using a good IDE with an LSP. But it is quite a regrettable situation because setting up an LSP can be a difficult, and they also tend to break quite easily. Understanding how to make an LSP work is an important productivity skill in those kinds of positions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And ccache or ninja. Something that reduces the amount of stuff that has be rebuilt.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 year ago

    Interesting, I had never heard of ccache before, though yes, all good build systems (CMake, Ninja, etc.) should cache intermediate object files.

    But the projects I was working on were so large that even binary and unit test executables were so large that even they would take ~20 seconds to link. You can't use caching to alleviate that buildtime cost unfortunately.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    Python is largely compiled. All the pieces of a compiler are built into how it processes things. Almost nothing works on an interpreter model anymore, where each line is parsed and executed before handling the next. Unix-style shell scripts are one of the very few exceptions. I believe JavaScript also starts being interpreted in the browser in order to start executing immediately, but then a compiled version is swapped into the runtime as soon as it's ready.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Depends on what you mean by compiled. Python typically translates to meta code and that is interpreted. True compilation to binary runs about 100x faster. Python is slow though there are faster versions and ways around it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    I mean that there are successive steps to transform the entire code into tokens, the tokens into an AST, and the AST into some intermediary or final form.

    True compilation to binary runs about 100x faster.

    No, it doesn't. Take a look at any of the number of projects that have attempted to compile Java to native code over the years. You'd be lucky to see any substantive gain at all. They sometimes have a use for packaging everything up in a single distributed binary, but you don't do it for speed.

    Things like C and Rust are fast because the language semantics can be compiled in a fast way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    We will have to disagree on that. This is all problem spectific, but I have found C code integrated via ctypes, cffi, or by a C extension is over 100x Python alone. Interestingly Python, Numba, and Numpy together which is a more pythonic solution can get to those speeds too.

    All of the other approaches I have tried are much slower: Nuitka, Cython, Numpy alone, PyPy, etc.

    To get best speeds one has to compile for your specific architecture and enable things like vectorization, auto parallel, and fast math. Most default builds including libraries do not do that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    This is all problem spectific, but I have found C code integrated via ctypes, cffi, or by a C extension is over 100x Python alone. Interestingly Python, Numba, and Numpy together which is a more pythonic solution can get to those speeds too.

    Of course you did. Those are changing the semantics of the language. For example, things like Numpy store arrays more like how C does it than Python. That makes all the difference, not merely compiling to native code.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    You can get about 10x by compiling Python using PyPy. So compiling is not nothing. Using Numpy alone is about 5x which surprised me. There is a lot of missleading stuff out there about how to make Python fast. Lot of people say CPython is pretty fast or that using a binary library like numpy is fast. No CPython is very slow and libraries are not always that fast.

    Edit: Another compiler is Numba which is more specialized. It can get 30x on some code without numpy. Again compiling can help.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent