[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Python people strive to embrace LuaJIT
- From: Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@...>
- Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:47:05 +0200
steve donovan, 03.09.2010 11:41:
Python developers should also be aware of projects like Lunatic
Python, which provides two-way interoperability between the languages.
I (obiously) know about that project. Lupa also targets two-way
interoperability but restricts itself to one-way embedding. It mostly tries
to make Lua feel good in Python.
Here is a semi-serious suggestion, which I'm probably going to get
flamed for anyway. Make a Python dialect and compile it to Lua 5.1
bytecodes, in such a way that the result is JIT-able.
There are a couple of JIT compilers in the Python world these days: PyPy
and Unladen Swallow, as well as the Python implementations for .NET
(IronPython) and the JVM (Jython). I could imagine that Lua as a PyPy
backend might provide a way to reimplement Python in Lua(JIT), but I
somehow doubt that it would be worth the effort.
> There are going to be semantic mismatches, which is why I say 'dialect';
> it's probably more correct to say 'a language with Python syntax'
If you go that route, I think Shedskin is the current top-of-the-list. It
compiles static, Python-like code to impressively fast C++ code.
Pythonistas are very attached to whitespace as syntax ;)
Readability counts. :)
As for batteries, Penlight started as an attempt to clone some
convenient Python libraries for Lua programmers.
Interesting. I think an effort to provide something like an "extended
standard library" that people just grab instead of writing their own is a
good idea. Now, all that's missing is to get those batteries *included*. ;)