D

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

bearophile wrote:

> Dave:
>>It seems that bearophile basically wants a GP / systems language and tools
>>that are nearly as productive as the likes of Python but can also produce
>>blazingly fast code.<
> 
> The things I like can't be summarized in few lines, but one of the things
> I like more is the following.
> 
> Developing ShedSkin (that translates implicitly statically typed Python
> programs ==> C++) I have seen that it can exist a language that at the
> same time has a short and very handy syntax and produces very fast
> programs. The "good" thing is that it doesn't require big inventions, all
> the necessary parts exists already, to it's not a revolution (some people
> like revolutions, so this isn't for them). Languages like Genie, Delight,
> ShedSkin, Vala, Boo, Cython, Rpython, etc (and OcaML too, probably), go in
> this direction. The D language too (with the right libraries) can become
> almost handy.
> 
> The last two posts here show examples of what I mean:
> http://leonardo-m.livejournal.com/72504.html
> http://leonardo-m.livejournal.com/72754.html
> 
> In both situations a ShedSkin program is both shorter/cleaner and quite
> faster than the D ones (the speed increase generally comes from GCC
> optimizing better than DMD).

It must be stated that "cleaner" is in the eye of the beholder - IMO Python does _not_ produce cleaner programs. It is harder to say how the implicitly statically typed stuff of ShedSkin affects mantainability, but I guess one could expect/hope for it to be better than normal Python.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango