Re: [Gzz] Tuukka 2002-07-26 (languages, cleaning)

[Tuomas Lukka]

On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 12:00:04AM +0200, address@hidden wrote:
> > Tuomas agreed we can backport the code to 2.1 so we wouldn't depend on
> > Python at all. Later, if all Java code is rewritten in Python, we have the
> > possibility of changing the interpreter from Jython to Python. Should we
> > target that?
> 
> Too slow. Please, don't rewrite vobs in Python so that I have to run them in
> Jython-on-Java-without-JIT (on my Mac: kaffe does *not* have JIT on ppc yet,
> and IBM's new ppc JIT segfaults on me, but that's just BTW).

Uhmm, that was not what was meant; the point was to convert code that
currently uses C-python 2.2 to use Jython 2.1 so that we only need one
interpreter.

I would never allow a change that would put jython code in the middle
of the user keystroke --> screen update path without some serious benchmarks.

Fear not ;)

> Python or Python plus C/C++ is worth thinking (I wanna run on pure Free
> Software...), and it's a thought I've had, too, but rewriting *everything* in
> Python while we're still running it on slow Java VMs is not gonna work.

Indeed.

> We *could* try to target Java VMs and Python at the same time, providing
> Python (or C/C++ extension modules) implementations of all interfaces. Tuomas 
> is
> worried about the client being in Jython for performance reasons I think,
> but I also think that except for the startup that would be ok-- would have to
> test.

One thing I've been thinking about is enhancing python a little by "hints"
or something that would allow compiling jython into Java speeds, by providing
type hints etc in a different file or something.

> Anyway, it's certainly not a short term goal IMO (short term goal is to get
> 0.6 out). For purely social reasons, I would also in any case ask very much
> for keeping Java at least till end of 2002: The Gzz project at my school was
> accepted on the base of it being a Java programming project (I know we haven't
> contributed very much yet, but I still want it to go on).

Yes, leaving Java is not in the sight for a while.

        Tuomas