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

Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 140 posts

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#51

Post by TZubiri »

leobuskin wrote: post #11

A few problems with this Fable's project: 1. It's not Python by any means, it's a subset with its own runtime, its own quirks and nuances; 2. It will be impossible to maintain parity with CPython without AI assistance; 3. It will die the same way as dozens of similar (even non-AI projects) died before, and reasons will be the same: (1) and (2).

>1. It's not Python by any means, it's a subset with its own runtime, its own quirks and nuances;

A subset of python is python. Half a tomato is still tomato

>2. It will be impossible to maintain parity with CPython without AI assistance

What does that even mean? If you would have said that it's impossible to update to python 3.15 of further, I'd get it.

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#53

Post by bunderbunder »

rurban wrote: post #27
leobuskin wrote: post #11

A few problems with this Fable's project: 1. It's not Python by any means, it's a subset with its own runtime, its own quirks and nuances; 2. It will be impossible to maintain parity with CPython without AI assistance; 3. It will die the same way as dozens of similar (even non-AI projects) died before, and reasons will be the same: (1) and (2).

Reading is hard. It runs and passes the full cpython testsuite, just 5x faster. With AI it's 100x easier to maintain than by hand. It reminds my on pperl. same approach using crane lift. Looks good

The “status” section of the project’s readme explicitly says that it is not passing the full test suite, and that the AOT compiler passes fewer tests than the JIT one.

It also explicitly says that they’re still working on building out the standard library.

I’m maybe not as pessimistic as leobuskin, but they are absolutely right that this is not the first time someone has tried to build an alternative Python implementation, and that all previous ones have failed because they weren’t able to get close enough to 100% parity to be acceptable to most users. Python is an unusually quirky language. I kind of wonder if “written in Rust” adds an extra headwind here because there’s nothing even remotely memory-safe about Python’s extension mechanism. I don’t know enough to know, but I have read about the death of a few of these projects in the past and a common theme of the post-mortem seems to be, “It went so smoothly at the start that we were caught off guard how much of a brick wall the last 5% was going to be.”

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#54

Post by hannasanarion »

coldtea wrote: post #32
leobuskin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible, but we're at the moment when most of us can ask Fable to implement a custom compiler to a custom target for our favorite language, and even use it as a part of custom solution. Why do I need someone else's implementation? Where's the magic in this project? What's the secret sauce?

> Where's the magic in this project? What's the secret sauce? Someone else paying for the tokens. Also someone seeing it through (should that come). Obviously we're not "at the moment when most of us can ask Fable to implement a custom compiler to a custom target for our favorite language, and even use it as a part of custom solution", without thousands to spare and lots of time to shape the solution.

Even if it does cost thousands (does it? I genuinely have no idea how to scope such a thing) that might be a good price if a custom compiler to your custom target is something you really want. People have paid far more for far less.

If you're a hobbyist trying to compile python to your weird little arduino based thing, then that's a lot of money and you would want to use somebody else's solution, no doubt.

But if you're an aerospace company trying to compile for a flight control computer (and I guess you really want to use python for some reason), spending thousands of dollars on tokens to make and maintain a custom compiler could represent serious savings.

The big picture impact of AI that I see/anticipate the most is SAAS dying out because AI coding makes this kind of enablement and support software easier to make in-house, and this feels like an example of that, but maybe I'm seeing what I expect to see.

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#55

Post by what »

ttul wrote: post #47
kameit00 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 12 months… vibe code mess. Or discontinued. Or both.

How much time have you spent with Fable? We're in new territory here. It does not create messes.

>this time it’s different!

Same thing people claim every time a new model is released, yet never seems to be true.

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#56

Post by bloppe »

zero1009 wrote: post #50
all2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time-cost for machines instead of willing knowledgeable humans. The former requires money, the latter requires passion. Arguably, passion for a project is without price.

Someone pays for the AI? That's the new human maintainer.

Hypothetically, maybe. In practice, probably not.

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#58

Post by geraneum »

TZubiri wrote: post #51
leobuskin wrote: post #11

A few problems with this Fable's project: 1. It's not Python by any means, it's a subset with its own runtime, its own quirks and nuances; 2. It will be impossible to maintain parity with CPython without AI assistance; 3. It will die the same way as dozens of similar (even non-AI projects) died before, and reasons will be the same: (1) and (2).

>1. It's not Python by any means, it's a subset with its own runtime, its own quirks and nuances; A subset of python is python. Half a tomato is still tomato >2. It will be impossible to maintain parity with CPython without AI assistance What does that even mean? If you would have said that it's impossible to update to python 3.15 of further, I'd get it.

> A subset of python is python. Half a tomato is still tomato

The funny thing about this is not that the first sentence is wrong, which it is. It’s the failed reductio ad absurdum.

Re: Python 3.14 compiled to metal – no interpreter

#59

Post by nozzlegear »

zero1009 wrote: post #50
all2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time-cost for machines instead of willing knowledgeable humans. The former requires money, the latter requires passion. Arguably, passion for a project is without price.

Someone pays for the AI? That's the new human maintainer.

Who will pay if someone, somewhere is not passionate about it?
Post reply on HN