Victor Stinner, 18.07.2012 00:15: >> Personally, I like the idea of having a JIT compiler more or less as an >> extension module at hand. Sort-of like a co-processor, just in software. >> Lets you run your code either interpreter or JITed, just as you need. > > Me too, so something like psyco. In the sense that it's a third party module, yes. Not in the sense of how it hooks into the runtime. The intention would be that users explicitly run their code in a JIT compiled environment, e.g. their template processing or math code. The runtime wouldn't switch to a JIT compiler automatically for "normal" code. I mean, that could still become a feature at some point, but I find a decorator or an exec-like interface quite acceptable, as long as it fails loudly with "can't do that" if the JIT compiler doesn't support a specific language feature. Stefan
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4