• "CPython"

    From Stefan Ram@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jun 20 17:19:31 2022
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paulo da Silva@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jun 20 20:01:51 2022
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/

    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are
    derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stefan Ram@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Mon Jun 20 20:07:37 2022
    Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> writes:
    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Whether a source is considered "credible" is something
    everyone must decide for themselves.

    I can say that the overwhelming majority of results of Web
    searches about this topic yields expressions of the view
    that the "C" in "CPython" stands for C, "overwhelming
    majority" when compared to expressions of other interpretations
    of that "C", and "overwhelming majority" meaning something
    like more than 90 percent.

    For one example, there seems to be a book "CPython Internals"
    which seems to say, according to one Web search engine:

    |The C in CPython is a reference to the C programming
    |language, indicating that this Python distribution is
    |written in the C language.

    .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dennis Lee Bieber@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jun 20 15:31:32 2022
    On Mon, 20 Jun 2022 20:01:51 +0100, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> declaimed the following:


    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: >https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/

    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are >derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?


    Well, let's start at the top...

    https://www.python.org/download/alternatives/ ("traditional" implying implemented in C).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPython

    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17130975/python-vs-cpython https://www.c-sharpcorner.com/article/why-learn-python-an-introduction-to-python/
    https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-various-implementations-python/

    There is some plagiarism between a number of web-sites, but they all emphasize the "CPython" is a reference implementation and that it is
    written in C vs Java (Jython), C# (IronPython -- which M$ may be
    deprecating these days, based on some stuff in my last Visual Studio
    update), or other....


    --
    Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Angelico@21:1/5 to Stefan Ram on Tue Jun 21 07:12:02 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 06:31, Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:

    Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> writes:
    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Whether a source is considered "credible" is something
    everyone must decide for themselves.

    I can say that the overwhelming majority of results of Web
    searches about this topic yields expressions of the view
    that the "C" in "CPython" stands for C, "overwhelming
    majority" when compared to expressions of other interpretations
    of that "C", and "overwhelming majority" meaning something
    like more than 90 percent.

    For one example, there seems to be a book "CPython Internals"
    which seems to say, according to one Web search engine:

    |The C in CPython is a reference to the C programming
    |language, indicating that this Python distribution is
    |written in the C language.


    Does python.org count as "credible"?

    https://docs.python.org/3/reference/introduction.html

    CPython: This is the original and most-maintained implementation of
    Python, written in C.

    I think that's about as close as you're going to get to an answer.
    Given that it is, in that page, being distinguished from Jython
    (implemented in Python), PyPy (implemented in Python), Python for .NET (implemented for the .NET runtime), and IronPython (one of these is
    not like the others, whatever, but it's the one originally implemented
    for .NET), it seems fairly safe to say that the C in CPython means the implementation language.

    If someone wants to contradict this, they'll need a strong source,
    like a post from a core dev back when Jython was brand new.

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Angelico@21:1/5 to PythonList@danceswithmice.info on Tue Jun 21 08:02:38 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 08:01, dn <PythonList@danceswithmice.info> wrote:

    On 21/06/2022 09.47, Roel Schroeven wrote:
    ...

    So we have an untrustworthy site that's the only one to claim that
    CPython is short for Core Python, and we have an official site that says CPython is so named because it's written in C. Hm, which one to believe?


    ...and so you can C that the only important part is the Python!

    I should have cn that coming.

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dn@21:1/5 to Roel Schroeven on Tue Jun 21 10:00:18 2022
    On 21/06/2022 09.47, Roel Schroeven wrote:
    ...

    So we have an untrustworthy site that's the only one to claim that
    CPython is short for Core Python, and we have an official site that says CPython is so named because it's written in C. Hm, which one to believe?


    ...and so you can C that the only important part is the Python!
    --
    Regards,
    =dn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Angelico@21:1/5 to Roel Schroeven on Tue Jun 21 08:02:13 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 07:48, Roel Schroeven <roel@roelschroeven.net> wrote:

    Paulo da Silva schreef op 20/06/2022 om 21:01:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/

    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are derived from, ...".

    Counterpoint: https://wiki.python.org/moin/SummerOfCode/2017/python-core
    says "The reference implementation of Python is CPython, so named
    because it's written in C." Even in the absence of other evidence I'd
    much rather trust a python.org page than a www.analyticsinsight.net page
    on the subject of Python implementations.

    Be aware that this is a wiki, so anyone can edit it. But that also
    means you can check the "Info" link to see the history of the page,
    and in this case, the text in question was added by user TerriOda, who
    - as can be confirmed in various places - is heavily involved in GSOC
    Python projects and the like, so I would consider this to be fairly
    good information.

    (Though I can't honestly say whether many of the core Python devs read
    that wiki, so it's always possible that false information stays there untouched.)

    But there's more.

    Apart from www.analyticsinsight.net I can't find any website that
    mentions "Core Python" as a Python implementation. That's a strong
    indication that www.analyticsinsight.net is wrong on that point. Frankly
    that website seems very low quality in general. In that same article
    they say:

    "CPython is a descendant of Pyscript built on Pyodide, a port of
    CPython, or a Python distribution for the browser and Node.js that is
    based on Webassembly and Emscripten."

    CPython is definitely not a descendant of Pyscript! Looks like someone
    found something (semi-) interesting and tried to write something
    insightful about it, but without really understanding any of it. Other articles don't seem to be any better.

    So we have an untrustworthy site that's the only one to claim that
    CPython is short for Core Python, and we have an official site that says CPython is so named because it's written in C. Hm, which one to believe?


    I think that's about as settled as it'll ever be. Like many things, it
    doesn't necessarily have any stronger origin than "someone started
    using the term, and it stuck". Reminds me of trying to research the
    origin of the name "Idle" (or "IDLE" - the Integrated Development and
    Learning Environment") and being unable to find any proof that it was
    named after a certain Eric, but nothing to disprove it either...

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roel Schroeven@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Mon Jun 20 23:47:20 2022
    Paulo da Silva schreef op 20/06/2022 om 21:01:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/

    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are derived from, ...".

    Counterpoint: https://wiki.python.org/moin/SummerOfCode/2017/python-core
    says "The reference implementation of Python is CPython, so named
    because it's written in C." Even in the absence of other evidence I'd
    much rather trust a python.org page than a www.analyticsinsight.net page
    on the subject of Python implementations.

    But there's more.

    Apart from www.analyticsinsight.net I can't find any website that
    mentions "Core Python" as a Python implementation. That's a strong
    indication that www.analyticsinsight.net is wrong on that point. Frankly
    that website seems very low quality in general. In that same article
    they say:

    "CPython is a descendant of Pyscript built on Pyodide, a port of
    CPython, or a Python distribution for the browser and Node.js that is
    based on Webassembly and Emscripten."

    CPython is definitely not a descendant of Pyscript! Looks like someone
    found something (semi-) interesting and tried to write something
    insightful about it, but without really understanding any of it. Other
    articles don't seem to be any better.

    So we have an untrustworthy site that's the only one to claim that
    CPython is short for Core Python, and we have an official site that says CPython is so named because it's written in C. Hm, which one to believe?

    --
    "In the old days, writers used to sit in front of a typewriter and stare out of the window. Nowadays, because of the marvels of convergent technology, the thing
    you type on and the window you stare out of are now the same thing.”
    -- Douglas Adams

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dn@21:1/5 to Chris Angelico on Tue Jun 21 10:25:06 2022
    On 21/06/2022 10.02, Chris Angelico wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 08:01, dn <PythonList@danceswithmice.info> wrote:

    On 21/06/2022 09.47, Roel Schroeven wrote:
    ...

    So we have an untrustworthy site that's the only one to claim that
    CPython is short for Core Python, and we have an official site that says >>> CPython is so named because it's written in C. Hm, which one to believe?


    ...and so you can C that the only important part is the Python!

    I should have cn that coming.


    Which is a terribly OT invitation to make the (these days non-PC) Monty
    Python joke: "No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj8n4MfhjUc)
    --
    Regards,
    =dn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paulo da Silva@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 01:53:38 2022
    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
       The same personality traits that make people react
       to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
       ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

       The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

       CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

       The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/


    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and,
    BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written in C".

    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again,
    is just my opinion and nothing more.

    I rest my case.
    Thank you all.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Angelico@21:1/5 to p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.p on Tue Jun 21 11:33:23 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/


    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and,
    BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written in C".

    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again,
    is just my opinion and nothing more.


    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from
    "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it
    distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.

    I could, perhaps, create my own interpreter and name it "RosuavPython"
    after myself, but when something's made by a team, it's usually more
    useful to pick something that is fundamental to it (Brython is
    designed to be run in a browser, Jython is written in Python to make
    it easy to call on Java classes, etc).

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Rubin@21:1/5 to Chris Angelico on Mon Jun 20 19:04:09 2022
    Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it
    distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.

    MicroPython is also written in C, heh.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paulo da Silva@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 03:38:14 2022
    Às 02:33 de 21/06/22, Chris Angelico escreveu:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read:
    https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/


    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are
    derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and,
    BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written in C". >>
    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again,
    is just my opinion and nothing more.


    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Notice that they are, for example, Jython and not JPython.
    There is also Cython that is a different thing.

    And YES. You have the right to not feel that as strange.

    Regards
    Paulo

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MRAB@21:1/5 to Chris Angelico on Tue Jun 21 03:20:16 2022
    On 2022-06-21 02:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read:
    https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/


    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are
    derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and,
    BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written in C". >>
    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again,
    is just my opinion and nothing more.


    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it
    distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.

    And just to make it clear, the interpreter/compiler _itself_ is still
    called "python". "CPython" is a name/term that was applied retroactively
    to that particular implementation when another implementation appeared.

    I could, perhaps, create my own interpreter and name it "RosuavPython"
    after myself, but when something's made by a team, it's usually more
    useful to pick something that is fundamental to it (Brython is
    designed to be run in a browser, Jython is written in Python to make
    it easy to call on Java classes, etc).

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Avi Gross@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 02:52:28 2022
    This leads to the extremely important question of what would an implementation of Python, written completely in C++, be called?
    C++Python
    CPython++
    C+Python+
    DPython
    SeaPython?
    SeeSeaSiPython

    I don't even want to think fo what sound a C# Python would make.
    OK, my apologies to all. Being an interpreted language, it makes sense for a good part of the interpreter to include parts made in other languages and also add-on libraries in even older languages like FORTRAN.  Quite a few languages, including some
    like R, are also partially based on C in similar ways. 

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt>
    To: python-list@python.org
    Sent: Mon, Jun 20, 2022 8:53 pm
    Subject: Re: "CPython"

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
       The same personality traits that make people react
       to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
       ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

       The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

       CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

       The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/


    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and,
    BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written in C".

    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again,
    is just my opinion and nothing more.

    I rest my case.
    Thank you all.
    --
    https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paulo da Silva@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 03:56:07 2022
    Às 03:20 de 21/06/22, MRAB escreveu:
    On 2022-06-21 02:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva
    <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
        The same personality traits that make people react
        to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
        ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

        The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

        CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

        The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read:

    https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/



    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are >>> > derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and, >>> BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written
    in C".

    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again, >>> is just my opinion and nothing more.


    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from
    "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it
    distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.

    And just to make it clear, the interpreter/compiler _itself_ is still
    called "python". "CPython" is a name/term that was applied retroactively
    to that particular implementation when another implementation appeared.
    Yes, but that does not necessarily means that the C has to refer to the language of implementation. It may well be a "core" reference to
    distinguish that implementation from others with different behaviors.

    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is
    better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?
    It's my opinion that it should stay as CPython.
    After all who cares in which language it is implemented?

    Regards.
    Paulo

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Angelico@21:1/5 to python-list@python.org on Tue Jun 21 15:12:08 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 12:53, Avi Gross via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:

    I don't even want to think fo what sound a C# Python would make.

    Probably about 277 Hz...

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Angelico@21:1/5 to p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.p on Tue Jun 21 15:15:31 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 13:12, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 03:20 de 21/06/22, MRAB escreveu:
    On 2022-06-21 02:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva
    <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read:

    https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/



    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core >>> > Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are >>> > derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and, >>> BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written
    in C".

    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again, >>> is just my opinion and nothing more.


    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from
    "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it
    distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.

    And just to make it clear, the interpreter/compiler _itself_ is still called "python". "CPython" is a name/term that was applied retroactively
    to that particular implementation when another implementation appeared.
    Yes, but that does not necessarily means that the C has to refer to the language of implementation. It may well be a "core" reference to
    distinguish that implementation from others with different behaviors.

    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?
    It's my opinion that it should stay as CPython.
    After all who cares in which language it is implemented?


    It is HIGHLY unlikely that the reference implementation would change
    overnight. Far far more likely, if the reference implementation were
    to change, would be that the new interpreter is built for a number of
    years as an alternative, and then eventually becomes the more popular implementation, and finally, the core devs begin using that more than
    CPython, and perhaps deprecating CPython altogether. If that were to
    happen, the other implementation would have its own name for all those
    years, and would keep it after being promoted to reference
    implementation.

    Also, "PyPy" is a perfectly fine name and doesn't need to be changed.

    ChrisA

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jak@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 10:11:36 2022
    Il 21/06/2022 04:56, Paulo da Silva ha scritto:
    Às 03:20 de 21/06/22, MRAB escreveu:
    On 2022-06-21 02:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva
    <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:

    [snip]

    After all who cares in which language it is implemented?

    Regards.
    Paulo


    Why are you asking this? The Facebook platform which is mainly developed
    in Rust are converting it to C to make it faster and lighter. If as
    often happens, many people complain about the speed of python, what
    would be the purpose of translating python using a slower language?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg Ewing@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Tue Jun 21 19:53:51 2022
    On 21/06/22 2:56 pm, Paulo da Silva wrote:
    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?

    The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new
    implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever.
    The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the
    reference implementation.

    Although if it were called RPython, no doubt a new debate would
    flare up over whether the "R" stands for "Rust" or "Reference"...

    --
    Greg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg Ewing@21:1/5 to Avi Gross on Tue Jun 21 19:49:30 2022
    On 21/06/22 2:52 pm, Avi Gross wrote:

    This leads to the extremely important question of what would an implementation of Python, written completely in C++, be called?

    (Pronounced with a comical stutter) "C-p-p-python!")

    --
    Greg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg Ewing@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Tue Jun 21 19:48:20 2022
    On 21/06/22 2:38 pm, Paulo da Silva wrote:
    Notice that they are, for example, Jython and not JPython.

    Jython *was* originally called JPython, but that was judged to be
    a trademark violation and they were made to change it.

    I don't know how MicroPython has escaped the same fate to date.

    --
    Greg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Christian Gollwitzer@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 09:37:50 2022
    Am 20.06.22 um 22:47 schrieb Roel Schroeven:
    indication that www.analyticsinsight.net is wrong on that point. Frankly
    that website seems very low quality in general. In that same article
    they say:

    "CPython is a descendant of Pyscript built on Pyodide, a port of
    CPython, or a Python distribution for the browser and Node.js that is
    based on Webassembly and Emscripten."

    CPython is definitely not a descendant of Pyscript! Looks like someone
    found something (semi-) interesting and tried to write something
    insightful about it, but without really understanding any of it. Other articles don't seem to be any better.

    To me, this sentence is so badly cobbled together that it could be the
    output of a KI of some sort (GPT-3) trying to summarize stuff from the
    web. It doesn't make any sense at all on a semantic level.

    Christian

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg Ewing@21:1/5 to Christian Gollwitzer on Tue Jun 21 21:11:16 2022
    On 21/06/22 8:37 pm, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
    Am 20.06.22 um 22:47 schrieb Roel Schroeven:
    "CPython is a descendant of Pyscript built on Pyodide, a port of
    CPython, or a Python distribution for the browser and Node.js that is
    based on Webassembly and Emscripten."

    To me, this sentence is so badly cobbled together that it could be the
    output of a KI of some sort (GPT-3) trying to summarize stuff from the
    web.

    It looks to me like the output of a Markov chain that's been fed
    with all the latest programming buzzwords.

    --
    Greg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Rubin@21:1/5 to Greg Ewing on Tue Jun 21 02:27:31 2022
    Greg Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> writes:
    Jython *was* originally called JPython, but that was judged to be
    a trademark violation and they were made to change it.

    What? I never heard of such a dispute. The PSF got after someone about
    it? Sheesh.

    I don't know how MicroPython has escaped the same fate to date.

    Also IronPython, CircuitPython, and maybe a few others.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dennis Lee Bieber@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 08:36:53 2022
    tOn Tue, 21 Jun 2022 02:52:28 +0000 (UTC), Avi Gross <avigross@verizon.net> declaimed the following:


    I don't even want to think fo what sound a C# Python would make.

    A musical hiss on a frequency of 277.183Hz (for the C# above middle-C)


    --
    Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg Ewing@21:1/5 to Paul Rubin on Wed Jun 22 00:31:38 2022
    On 21/06/22 9:27 pm, Paul Rubin wrote:
    What? I never heard of such a dispute. The PSF got after someone about
    it? Sheesh.

    Upon further research, it seems it wasn't the *Python* trademark that
    was at issue. From the Jython FAQ page:


    1.2 How does Jython relate to JPython?

    Jython is the successor to JPython. The Jython project was created in accordance with the CNRI JPython 1.1.x license, in order to ensure the continued existence and development of this important piece of Python
    software. The intent is to manage this project with the same open
    policies that are serving CPython so well.

    The name had to be changed to something other than JPython, because of paragraph 4 in the JPython-1.1 license:

    4. Licensee may not use CNRI trademarks or trade name, including
    JPython [...] to endorse or promote products [...]


    So there was no dispute, they were just following the terms of a
    licence.

    --
    Greg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dennis Lee Bieber@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 08:29:43 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 01:53:38 +0100, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> declaimed the following:


    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again,
    is just my opinion and nothing more.


    The whole purpose for that was to differentiate from Python /language/ implemented in OTHER languages. IronPython is a M$ .NET/C# implementation, Jython is a JVM/Java implementation.

    When you just say "Python" you are referring to ALL of those implementations.


    --
    Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dennis Lee Bieber@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 21 08:34:26 2022
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 19:53:51 +1200, Greg Ewing
    <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> declaimed the following:

    Although if it were called RPython, no doubt a new debate would
    flare up over whether the "R" stands for "Rust" or "Reference"...

    Or does RPython refer to a Python integrated into the R statistics system? <G>

    Actually -- RPython is already taken... https://rpython.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

    """
    RPython is a translation and support framework for producing
    implementations of dynamic languages, emphasizing a clean separation
    between language specification and implementation aspects.

    By separating concerns in this way, our implementation of Python - and
    other dynamic languages - is able to automatically generate a Just-in-Time compiler for any dynamic language. It also allows a mix-and-match approach
    to implementation decisions, including many that have historically been
    outside of a user’s control, such as target platform, memory and threading models, garbage collection strategies, and optimizations applied, including whether or not to have a JIT in the first place.
    """


    --
    Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Grant Edwards@21:1/5 to Chris Angelico on Tue Jun 21 06:09:02 2022
    On 2022-06-21, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:

    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it
    distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.

    I've been using CPython (and reading this list) for over 20 years, and
    there's no doubt in my mind that the C in CPython has always been
    interpreted by 99+ percent of the Python community as meaning the implementation language.

    Sort of like ckermit <https://www.kermitproject.org/> was the original implementation of Kermit written in C. At the time, the other popular implementations (for DOS, IBM, etc.) were written in assembly.

    --
    Grant

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Eryk Sun@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Tue Jun 21 08:21:04 2022
    On 6/20/22, Paulo da Silva <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Yes, but that does not necessarily means that the C has to refer to the language of implementation. It may well be a "core" reference to
    distinguish that implementation from others with different behaviors.

    If the reference implementation and API ever switched to a different programming language, I'd personally be fine with changing the 'C" in
    "CPython" to mean "canonical", but not "core". The term "core" is used
    for building the interpreter core with access to internals (i.e.
    Py_BUILD_CORE, Py_BUILD_CORE_BUILTIN, Py_BUILD_CORE_MODULE, and Include/internal/pycore*.h). It does not refer to the overall
    implementation and API for embedding and extension modules.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MRAB@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Tue Jun 21 17:44:51 2022
    On 2022-06-21 03:38, Paulo da Silva wrote:
    Às 02:33 de 21/06/22, Chris Angelico escreveu:
    On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 11:13, Paulo da Silva
    <p_d_a_s_i_l_v_a_ns@nonetnoaddress.pt> wrote:

    Às 20:01 de 20/06/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
    Às 18:19 de 20/06/22, Stefan Ram escreveu:
    The same personality traits that make people react
    to troll postings might make them spread unconfirmed
    ideas about the meaning of "C" in "CPython".

    The /core/ of CPython is written in C.

    CPython is the /canonical/ implementation of Python.

    The "C" in "CPython" stands for C.



    Not so "unconfirmed"!
    Look at this article, I recently read:
    https://www.analyticsinsight.net/cpython-to-step-over-javascript-in-developing-web-applications/


    There is a sentence in ther that begins with "CPython, short for Core
    Python, a reference implementation that other Python distributions are >>>> derived from, ...".

    Anyway, I wrote "IMHO".

    Do you have any credible reference to your assertion "The "C" in
    "CPython" stands for C."?

    Thank you.

    Well ... I read the responses and they are not touching the point!
    I just answered, with my opinion based on articles I have read in the
    past. Certainly I could not be sure. That's why I responded as an
    opinion (IMHO) and not as an assertion.
    Stefan Ram responded with a, at least, not very polite post.
    That's why I needed to somehow "defend" why I posted that response, and, >>> BTW, trying to learn why he said that the C in CPython means "written in C".

    I still find very strange, to not say weird, that a compiler or
    interpreter has a name based in the language it was written. But, again, >>> is just my opinion and nothing more.


    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from
    "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Notice that they are, for example, Jython and not JPython.
    There is also Cython that is a different thing.

    And YES. You have the right to not feel that as strange.

    Jython was originally called JPython.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MRAB@21:1/5 to Avi Gross via Python-list on Tue Jun 21 17:42:09 2022
    On 2022-06-21 03:52, Avi Gross via Python-list wrote:

    This leads to the extremely important question of what would an implementation of Python, written completely in C++, be called?
    C++Python
    CPython++
    C+Python+
    DPython
    SeaPython?
    SeeSeaSiPython

    CincPython?

    FYI, there's a language called D, so DPython would be written in that.

    I don't even want to think fo what sound a C# Python would make.
    OK, my apologies to all. Being an interpreted language, it makes sense for a good part of the interpreter to include parts made in other languages and also add-on libraries in even older languages like FORTRAN.  Quite a few languages, including some
    like R, are also partially based on C in similar ways.
    [snip]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Avi Gross@21:1/5 to Paulo da Silva on Tue Jun 21 17:04:45 2022
    If we want to be humorous, RPython would obviously either be written in R, which really is not designed well for such purposes, or would be some kind of synthesis that already exists that allows you to run R and python code interchangeably on sort of
    shared data that I sometimes do in RSTUDIO.

    I like the way you think Greg. I did not consider how the ++ in C++ is a bit like stuttering and since python also starts with a P the effect would be something like C-p-p-python.

    My problem with that idea is, believe it or not, that it is too negative. What you meant to be seen as a dash is a minus sign to me. And both C and C++ not only have both a pre and post autoincrement variable using ++x and x++, they also have 
    autodecrement operators using a minus sign such as --x and x-- and it can get pretty weird trying to figure out if some code is legal, let alone what it does, without parentheses. I mean what the heck does this do?

    y = x++-++x

    The truth is that although I remember Bjarne trying to figure out a good name for his somewhat improved language and his choice of C++ rather than D or some other gimmick, you could argue he also removed a bit from C. But who would call a language C-- ?
    ?
    Back to serious. This discussion is more about names but is it?
    Some of the implementations of Python are not just written in some computer language but also in a sort of environment. Arguably some core of functionality has to be pretty much consistent to the language definition. But each may add interesting twists
    on its own and that can include the ability to easily link in code and libraries written in that language or used in that environment. You can have different supersets of a language.
    And it can impact where you might use the language as one reason people may not understand for using C is that a compiler was available for just about anywhere that either ran in that environment or could be run on another to produce lower-level code
    to copy to it. It was also possible to embed code in C that was evaluated differently in each environment for some level of fine-tuning.
    Some of that may eventually have been true for other implementations but I suspect not for some deliberately designed to fit what one party wants and with no care that it be shared elsewhere especially as the C version was already available there.
    Or am I wrong? After all, others who kept improving C thought the ++ concept was best removed!


    -----Original Message-----
    From: Greg Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz>
    To: python-list@python.org
    Sent: Tue, Jun 21, 2022 3:53 am
    Subject: Re: "CPython"

    On 21/06/22 2:56 pm, Paulo da Silva wrote:
    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?

    The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new
    implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever.
    The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the
    reference implementation.

    Although if it were called RPython, no doubt a new debate would
    flare up over whether the "R" stands for "Rust" or "Reference"...

    --
    Greg
    --
    https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 2QdxY4RzWzUUiLuE@potatochowder.com@21:1/5 to Avi Gross via Python-list on Tue Jun 21 12:24:27 2022
    On 2022-06-21 at 17:04:45 +0000,
    Avi Gross via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:

    My problem with that idea is, believe it or not, that it is too negative. What youmeant to be seen as a dash is a minus sign to me. And both C and C++ not onlyhave both a pre and post autoincrement variable using ++x and x++, they also have
    autodecrement operators using a minus sign such as --x and x-- and it can getpretty weird trying to figure out if some code is legal, let alone what it does, withoutparentheses. I mean what the heck does this do?

    y = x++-++x

    That code evokes (or at least can evoke) nasal demons.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undefined_behavior

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jkn@21:1/5 to Grant Edwards on Tue Jun 21 13:22:22 2022
    On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 2:09:27 PM UTC+1, Grant Edwards wrote:
    On 2022-06-21, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:

    Not sure why it's strange. The point is to distinguish "CPython" from "Jython" or "Brython" or "PyPy" or any of the other implementations.
    Yes, CPython has a special place because it's the reference
    implementation and the most popular, but the one thing that makes it distinct from all the others is that it's implemented in C.
    I've been using CPython (and reading this list) for over 20 years, and there's no doubt in my mind that the C in CPython has always been
    interpreted by 99+ percent of the Python community as meaning the implementation language.

    Sort of like ckermit <https://www.kermitproject.org/> was the original implementation of Kermit written in C. At the time, the other popular implementations (for DOS, IBM, etc.) were written in assembly.


    Same here, on both counts (20+ years on this Usenet group,
    and CPython == "the canonical C implementation of Python")

    Actually, on all three counts - I remember ckermit as well ;-)

    Fourthly...

    J^n

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg Ewing@21:1/5 to MRAB on Wed Jun 22 12:51:51 2022
    On 22/06/22 4:42 am, MRAB wrote:
    On 2022-06-21 03:52, Avi Gross via Python-list wrote:

    This leads to the extremely important question of what would an
    implementation of Python, written completely in C++, be called?
    C++Python
    CPython++
    C+Python+
    DPython
    SeaPython?
    SeeSeaSiPython

    CincPython?

    Python+=1

    --
    Greg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Rubin@21:1/5 to Greg Ewing on Tue Jun 21 18:58:42 2022
    Greg Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> writes:
    Python+=1

    I think you mean python.__next__()

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David J W@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 23 08:29:41 2022
    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is
    better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?

    The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new >implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever.
    The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the
    reference implementation.

    I am at the pre planning stages of making a Rust implementation of the
    Python virtual machine and to avoid ambiguity I've been working with Rython
    as the name. I tried looking for a Monty Python themed name but the good
    ones seem to be taken.

    Otherwise as for a timeline, solo I figure it's going to take me a couple
    years to get something that actually passes cpython's python unit-tests.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Avi Gross@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 23 15:42:25 2022
    David,
    I am curious why you are undertaking the effort to take a language already decades old and showing signs of being a tad rusty into a language that suggests further oxidation.
    More seriously, I am interested in what this can gain and the intended user base. I studied Rust for a while and it has it's features but have had no opportunity to use it. Is it expected to make a faster version of Python, or enable better
    connections to libraries and so on? 
    What I mean is that if you are planning on making it pass all tests for python functionality, are you also adding unique features or ... ?
    My preference is to have names that fully include what they are about. So the name "python" would be left intact rather than mangled, even if the name itself happens to be totally meaningless. So may I suggest something like """rustic-python""" ?


    -----Original Message-----
    From: David J W <ward.davidj@gmail.com>
    To: python-list@python.org
    Sent: Thu, Jun 23, 2022 10:29 am
    Subject: Re: "CPython"

    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is
    better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?

    The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new >implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever.
    The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the
    reference implementation.

    I am at the pre planning stages of making a Rust implementation of the
    Python virtual machine and to avoid ambiguity I've been working with Rython
    as the name.  I tried looking for a Monty Python themed name but the good
    ones seem to be taken.

    Otherwise as for a timeline, solo I figure it's going to take me a couple
    years to get something that actually passes cpython's python unit-tests.
    --
    https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David J W@21:1/5 to avigross@verizon.net on Fri Jun 24 09:57:23 2022
    The main motivation for a Python virtual machine in Rust is to strengthen
    my knowledge with Rust which currently has some gnarly bits to it but
    otherwise is an impressive low level language. Rust's future is looking
    very bright as even Linus Torvalds agrees with most of its design choices
    and is allowing it to be used as a linux kernel module language.

    Skipping ahead to the subject of names, Rython was chosen because "Python"
    is trademarked by the PSF so anything with the complete word Python in it
    is out. A close runner up would have been Camelot but that is already
    taken.

    Going backward to the issue of use and audience. Making Rython a real
    virtual machine that passes the CPython unit-tests is the only goal. I am actively following the faster CPython fork that Mike Shannon, GVR, and
    others are working on with the intention to try and incorporate what they discover into my project but I don't think Rython will be dramatically
    faster than Cpython because I am going to implement the same PyObject
    reference counting garbage collector and unless faster CPython creates a
    JIT component, Rython won't have one either. Additionally Ryhon won't have
    the must have killer libraries like numpy so it's a moot point if my
    project turns out to be dramatically faster.

    To sum things up, I've been retired for over a decade so I have plenty of
    free time. Initially I thought I might invest time into becoming a core python developer but looking into it further, all I will say is that
    doesn't feel like a very appealing use of my time.



    On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 9:42 AM Avi Gross <avigross@verizon.net> wrote:

    David,

    I am curious why you are undertaking the effort to take a language already decades old and showing signs of being a tad rusty into a language
    that suggests further oxidation.

    More seriously, I am interested in what this can gain and the intended
    user
    base. I studied Rust for a while and it has it's features but have had no opportunity to use it. Is it expected to make a faster version of Python,
    or enable better connections to libraries and so on?

    What I mean is that if you are planning on making it pass all tests for python functionality, are you also adding unique features or ... ?

    My preference is to have names that fully include what they are about.
    So the name "python" would be left intact rather than mangled, even if
    the name itself happens to be totally meaningless. So may I suggest
    something like """rustic-python""" ?



    -----Original Message-----
    From: David J W <ward.davidj@gmail.com>
    To: python-list@python.org
    Sent: Thu, Jun 23, 2022 10:29 am
    Subject: Re: "CPython"

    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is
    better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?

    The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new >implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever.
    The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the >reference implementation.

    I am at the pre planning stages of making a Rust implementation of the
    Python virtual machine and to avoid ambiguity I've been working with Rython as the name. I tried looking for a Monty Python themed name but the good ones seem to be taken.

    Otherwise as for a timeline, solo I figure it's going to take me a couple years to get something that actually passes cpython's python unit-tests.
    --
    https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Avi Gross@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 24 16:24:55 2022
    David,
    I understand now. As a project for your own edification I can understand it, albeit it is a more substantial effort than many people might choose, LOL!
    So unless it starts being used heavily and adopted by some organization, the result of your effort will not necessarily be compatible with many modules now available or keep up with changes as python adds features or fixes bugs.
    I am curious about why something like numpy could not be integrated into what you do. Of course, if you are the only user, ...
    My hobbies to spend my time may not be as ambitious, but are quite a bit more varied! LOL!



    -----Original Message-----
    From: David J W <ward.davidj@gmail.com>
    To: Avi Gross <avigross@verizon.net>
    Cc: python-list@python.org <python-list@python.org>
    Sent: Fri, Jun 24, 2022 11:57 am
    Subject: Re: "CPython"

    The main motivation for a Python virtual machine in Rust is to strengthen my knowledge with Rust which currently has some gnarly bits to it but otherwise is an impressive low level language.   Rust's future is looking very bright as even Linus Torvalds
    agrees with most of its design choices and is allowing it to be used as a linux kernel module language.   
    Skipping ahead to the subject of names, Rython was chosen because "Python" is trademarked by the PSF so anything with the complete word Python in it is out.   A close runner up would have been Camelot but that is already taken.
    Going backward to the issue of use and audience.  Making Rython a real virtual machine that passes the CPython unit-tests is the only goal.   I am actively following the faster CPython fork that Mike Shannon, GVR, and others are working on with the
    intention to try and incorporate what they discover into my project but I don't think Rython will be dramatically faster than Cpython because I am going to implement the same PyObject reference counting garbage collector and unless faster CPython creates
    a JIT component, Rython won't have one either.  Additionally Ryhon won't have the must have killer libraries like numpy so it's a moot point if my project turns out to be dramatically faster.
    To sum things up, I've been retired for over a decade so I have plenty of free time.   Initially I thought I might invest time into becoming a core python developer but looking into it further, all I will say is that doesn't feel like a very appealing
    use of my time.


    On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 9:42 AM Avi Gross <avigross@verizon.net> wrote:

    David,
    I am curious why you are undertaking the effort to take a language already decades old and showing signs of being a tad rusty into a language that suggests further oxidation.
    More seriously, I am interested in what this can gain and the intended user base. I studied Rust for a while and it has it's features but have had no opportunity to use it. Is it expected to make a faster version of Python, or enable better
    connections to libraries and so on? 
    What I mean is that if you are planning on making it pass all tests for python functionality, are you also adding unique features or ... ?
    My preference is to have names that fully include what they are about. So the name "python" would be left intact rather than mangled, even if the name itself happens to be totally meaningless. So may I suggest something like """rustic-python""" ?


    -----Original Message-----
    From: David J W <ward.davidj@gmail.com>
    To: python-list@python.org
    Sent: Thu, Jun 23, 2022 10:29 am
    Subject: Re: "CPython"

    Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is
    better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for
    example, or let it as CPython?

    The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new >implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever.
    The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the
    reference implementation.

    I am at the pre planning stages of making a Rust implementation of the
    Python virtual machine and to avoid ambiguity I've been working with Rython
    as the name.  I tried looking for a Monty Python themed name but the good
    ones seem to be taken.

    Otherwise as for a timeline, solo I figure it's going to take me a couple
    years to get something that actually passes cpython's python unit-tests.
    --
    https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Rubin@21:1/5 to Avi Gross on Fri Jun 24 15:26:03 2022
    Avi Gross <avigross@verizon.net> writes:
    I studied Rust for a while and it has it's features but have had no opportunity to use it. Is it expected to make a faster version of
    Python, or enable better connections to libraries and so on?

    I wouldn't expect it to be faster than the C version. The purpose of
    Rust is to have a high performance (like C or C++) language, but with a
    lot of compile time error checking, to prevent a lot of the runtime bugs
    that have traditionally plagued C programs (pointer errors, etc.)

    I'm also not sure of the benefit of reimplementing the Python VM in Rust without also reimplementing the rest of Python. The best route to
    higher runtime performance is probably a JIT compiler, i.e. PyPy.

    It might be interesting to use Cranelift (a JIT compiler written in
    Rust) for this. Maybe that is what David intends.

    Other than that, Rust has good ideas that will be new to most of us, so
    writing something in it sounds worthwhile for anyone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)