Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Jul 2006 22:31 UTC, submitted by Tom Magnum
Permalink for comment 144408
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-20
I think that misses the point. If you have a language-neutral JIT in place then you can use IronPython (or similar) or a whole host of other languages, with a performance that can approach native code. Using Python per se doesn't provide this.
The Mono CLR implementation isn't the only game in town, but it *is* probably more practical than many of the alternatives, at the moment.
Its quite possible that the memory and startup time issues would be *improved* using CLR, if the CLR was hosted by the desktop and 'applications' were loaded into an app domain within the single CLR, at least as an option.
I'm not convinced that Mono (or at least the core CLR and the GTK bindings part) is necessarily much more patent-threatened than Python. There are a lot of patents kicking around, and its rather likely that Python could be attacked, too.