Hacker News Reader

Comment by szastamasta | Hacker News Reader

This is kind of cool, but it all makes sense if your app is a very simple CRUD that spends 99% of time just passing json around. I have this feeling that when you add some more logic there you’ll start noticing that you’re not in a compiled language any more. Your requests will get slower and your memory usage will explode.

Saying that Python is faster than Go with this as a proof looks like overreaching for Me. It only proves that wrapping C code in Python is fast. It’s an achievement, sure, but your app probably won’t be faster when you add thousands of Python lines between request and response.

View on HN

i did not say that Python is faster than Go, i say that this Python Framework outperforms Golang Fiber framework in troughput.

I used https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks and in the future i will write fortunes and other benchmarks with have more things going on!

It does not say that Python is faster than Go it clearly says "Python framework".

> It only proves that wrapping C code in Python is fast.

Yes, it proves that for this specific use case Python is faster.

Technically, it is C that’s faster.

But that isn't the question. The question is what tool delivers the best performance. If I want to build some end-use-case software, should I adopt "Python Framework X" or "Golang Framework Y" to build this system? One consideration amongst many is performance. If you assume that the overall system with Go will be faster than the overall system with Python (and c modules) then you'd be wrong in this case. Other factors would inform your overall decision, but having more knowlege about tradeoffs enables one to make better engineering decisions.

Technically (not sure what you mean with this but with the context I will use it too as it seems to match with what I want to say) you could never talk about Python (the most common and original implementation) without making reference to C then.

And if you are not making reference to a specific implementation then the comparison does not make any sense.

Isn't there a difference between interpreting Python code with CPython (which I would call "Python") and running compiled C from Python (which I would call "C")?

Then it kind of make sense to talk about " pure Python" (the interpreted one) and "wrapped C", doesn't it?

> you could never talk about Python (the most common and original implementation) without making reference to C then.

Good. Because otherwise people would be mislead to think that Python itself is fast. The Python plus C combo has opposite tradeoffs in many dimensions.

Technically, python is written in C. What's your point?

Technically, golang was written in C. Why so combative?

I was just highlighting how saying "technically it's C that's faster" is a stupid think to say. Thanks for helping me make my point :D

Python (CPython) is written in C so always will be C, PyPy i think is C too? not sure.

Claiming python has blazing speed while literally being CPython is insanity. This is like saying "Im a natural body builder who only uses Test, HGH, and Dianabol". Great drop the natural part, similarily just advertise speed as CPython.

> Claiming python has blazing speed while literally being CPython is insanity

And it is not claimed anywhere. Besides, cpython is not really know to be fast, as it is an interpreter? Why would its implementation language matter much?

By bodybuilder standards, using just Test, HGH, and Dianabol is practically natty!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com