Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

blog.miguelgrinberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 579 posts

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#311

Post by Neywiny »

crote wrote: post #288
jcranmer wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30 years ago, right before Windows 95 came out, Windows was a 16-bit OS and the modern versions of Windows no longer support 16-bit programs. PCIe came out only in 2003, and I don't know that PCIe slots can support PCI. SATA is also from 2003. Even USB originally came out in 1996, and the only pre-USB connector slot I have on my computer is a PS/2 port (which honestly surprises me). For monitor connections, VGA and D…

PCIe is mostly backwards compatible with PCI, and bridge chips used to be quite common. ISA to PCI is harder, but not unheard of. "SATA" stands for "serial ATA", and has the same basic command set as the PATA from 1984 - bridge chips were widely used. And it all uses SCSI, which is also what USB Mass Storage Devices use. Or if you're feeling fancy, there's a whole SCSI-to-NVMe translation standard as well. HDMI is fu…

Slight caveat that a lot of Ethernet PHYs > 1G don't go down to 10 Mb, my some don't go to 100 Mb, and some are only the speed they want to be (though luckily that's not very common). There exist 6-speed PHYs (10,100,1000,2500,5000,10000) but that doesn't mean everything will happily talk

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#312

Post by ants_everywhere »

feoren wrote: post #82
amelius wrote: post #27

I hope it doesn't get stuck at 3.14, like TeX. https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditDayOf/comments/7we430/donald_...

You hope it doesn't ? > [Donald Knuth] firmly believes that having an unchanged system that will produce the same output now and in the future is more important than introducing new features This is such a breath of fresh air in a world where everything is considered obsolete after like 3 years. Our industry has a disease, an insatiable hunger for newness over completeness or correctness . There's no reason we can't…

> There's no reason we can't be writing code that lasts 100 years. Code is just math

Math is continually updated, clarified and rewritten. 100 years ago was before the Bourbaki group.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#313

Post by AlphaSite »

feoren wrote: post #82
amelius wrote: post #27

I hope it doesn't get stuck at 3.14, like TeX. https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditDayOf/comments/7we430/donald_...

You hope it doesn't ? > [Donald Knuth] firmly believes that having an unchanged system that will produce the same output now and in the future is more important than introducing new features This is such a breath of fresh air in a world where everything is considered obsolete after like 3 years. Our industry has a disease, an insatiable hunger for newness over completeness or correctness . There's no reason we can't…

While i think Latex is fantastic, i think there is plenty of low hanging fruit to improve upon it... the ergonomics of the language and its macros aren't great. If nothing else there should be a better investment in tooling and ecosystem.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#314

Post by aussieguy1234 »

I started using Python again recently after a 15 year break. The reason was I started working with LangChain, specifically LangGraph agents. The JavaScript/TypeScript versions are months behind. In the AI world with the progress thats been made recently, months might as well be years.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#315

Post by acomjean »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #215
dzonga wrote: post #157

seems loved languages such as python & ruby (ZJIT | TruffuleRuby) have been getting a lot performance improvements lately. of course JS with v8 kickstarted this - followed by PHP. so for majority of us folks use what you love - the performance will come.

As someone who was a hardcore python fanboy for a long time, no, no it won't. There are classes of things that you can only reasonably do in a language like rust, or where go/kotlin will save you a crazy amount of pain. Python is fine for orchestration and prototyping, but if it's the only arrow you have in your quiver you're in trouble.

I know sometimes performance doesn’t matter, and python is certainly useful, but it’s not fast. It can be fast enough and they’ve put a lot of effort into making fast libraries (called in c).

When doing bioinformatics we had someone update/rewrite a tool in java and it was so much faster. Went from a couple days to some like 4 hours of runtime.

Python certainly can be used in production (my experience maintaining some web applications in Java would make me reach for python/php/ruby to create a web backend speed be dammed). Python has some great libraries.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#316

Post by esafak »

wiseowise wrote: post #134
nadermx wrote: post #10

Tangential, but I practically owe my life to this guy. He wrote the flask mega tutorial in what I followed religiously to launch my first website. Then right before launch, in the most critical part of my entire application; piping a fragged file in flask. He answered my stackoverflow question, I put his fix live, and the site went viral. Here's the link for posterity's sake https://stackoverflow.com/a/34391304/41802…

> flask Off-topic, but I absolutely loathe new Flask logo. Old one[0] has this vintage, crafty feel. And the new one[1] looks like it was made by a starving high schooler experimenting with WordArt. [0] - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Flask_lo... [1] - https://flask.palletsprojects.com/en/stable/_images/flask-na...

https://medium.com/@tsecretdeveloper/why-logos-are-getting-b...

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#317

Post by liuliu »

kstrauser wrote: post #209
liuliu wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To put in perspective, 300ms is about looping over 30GiB data from RAM, loading 800MiB data from SSD, or doing 1TFLOPS on a single core computer. 300ms to generate a report would be able to go through ~100M rows at least (on a single core). And the implicit assumption that comment I made earlier, of course is not about the 100M rows scan. If there is a confusion, I am sorry.

That's all true, so long as you completely ignore doing any processing on the data, like evaluating the rows and selectively appending some of them into a data structure, then sorting and serializing the results, let alone optimizing the query plan for the state of the system at that moment and deciding whether it makes more sense to hit the indexes or just slurp in the whole table given that N other queries are also…

There is nothing for us to take away in this discussion. So let me be the first to tune down: all I want to say is: don't take that 300ms as given, it sits in this uncomfortable region too short to be an async op and too long to be noticeable (anything between 50ms and 2s fits this bill). Most likely the query is doing something suspicious and would benefit the most to take a closer look at.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#318

Post by [deleted] »

morganherlocker wrote: post #198
semiinfinitely wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because it turns out that optimizing performance of a programming language designed for use-cases where runtime performance doesn't matter ... doesn't matter

There's currently talk of adding gigawatts of data center capacity to the grid just for use cases where python dominates development. While a lot of that will be compiled into optimized kernels on CPU or GPU, it only takes a little bit of 1000x slower code to add up to a significant chunk of processing time at training or inference time.

[deleted]

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#320

Post by eightys3v3n »

modeless wrote: post #38

What are the reasons why nobody uses pypy?

It's not easily available in uv. Even if I installed it outside uv, it always seems significantly out of date. I'm running code in spaces where with uv I can control all the installs of Python, so I don't benefit from using an older release for compatibility.
Post reply on HN