Python 3.11 Performance Benchmarks Are Looking Fantastic

[abu_shawarib]

Pretty nice performance bumps.

[rabcor]

Dear python,
you are a slow scripting language. You are only getting improvements in performance because your baseline sucks. You are not fast. You will never be fast. You are suboptimal by design. Now do something useful and try to persuade anyone who cares about performance to use a compiled language instead of slow scripting languages. And stop trying to be fast, you will never be. Any attempt to optimise something suboptimal by design will result in something suboptimal by design. Accept your fate at last and stop tormenting us.

So let me get this straight, you think because python will never be the fastest it should just stop trying to improve in performance?

Gee, where would we be if everyone thought like you huh? regular cars wouldn't be able to drive faster than 30km/h cuz sport cars were always gonna be faster, and sport cars would actually probably not even be faster because they'd never be able to match speed with F1 race cars.

You need to get your head checked buddy. You still running a unicore PC because your PC will never be able to compete with supercomputers over there?

Meanwhile I'll be happy to see a faster python (and you're also wrong about python always being the slowest, there exist some very very fast implementations of python)

[tildearrow]

Python is alright, but it has greater problems than performance. It is an okay language for tinkers, students and non-developers who want to do programming such as biologists, mathematicians, etc but isn't good for developers.

• You cannot use this language on Android

Directly not, but through Termux yes.

[JanC]

Some parts of the community use reStructuredText which is something only known to the Python, that nobody outside heard about or cares about.

There are tens if not hundreds of thousands of projects using reStructuredText for documentation, including the Linux kernel…

[cynic]

When such huge "optimizations" take place I always wonder how sh*tty the code must've been before.

it doesn't have to be necessarily "sh*tty".
Sometimes we just see better solutions later or simply we don't optimize it first but try to make it work and then optimize later.

Or maybe yes, sometimes we make "sh*tty" code but it doesn't have to be always the case.

[JanC]

You cannot use this language on Android […].

The game I play the most on my Android phone is written in Python.

[sinepgib]

The game I play the most on my Android phone is written in Python.

Yeah, even the Python wiki lists a few ways https://wiki.python.org/moin/Android
I think OP meant that it isn't straightforward and it doesn't integrate easily, it's not part of the official SDK and all that.
To be fair, it may very well be a reason not to use Python (if you need to make an Android app, it's probably not the right tool if it's unsupported), but it's not really a valid criticism to Python itself. There's nothing they can do, they don't control the platform and the lack of support isn't an inherent problem of Python but a product decision of Android.

[darkonix]

Switches to Java, making everyone cry.

Well, now that you mentioned it, jython, the Java implementation of Python has been out there for ages.

[schmidtbag]

The "walrus operator" is just a gimmick ..it's good for clearer code (instead of 2 lines you write only one)

For me, Python's attempts at making code clearer since 3.0 is my main issue with it. When you have an optional alternative approach that has a specific use-case and does not yield any noteworthy performance improvements, it's just simply a bad idea. It makes the language harder to learn for noobs, it's another potential point of failure, it adds work for the developers of alternative interpreters, and it can throw a stick in the spokes of hobbyist developers who just want to get from point A to point B and can't figure out how because they're referring to a tutorial/example using something they never needed to use.

If something can save 3+ lines of code, then I'm more interested. But at that point, I'd rather just use a function.

One of Python's "selling points" is being easy. Gimmicks like walrus operators and decorators make things harder for everyone who doesn't make a living off writing in Python.

[JanC]

One of Python's "selling points" is being easy. Gimmicks like […] decorators make things harder for everyone who doesn't make a living off writing in Python.

While writing/understanding decorators might be hard for beginners, using them is usually easy…