From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53EC8138247 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:04:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 86103E0CD3; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f51.google.com (mail-vb0-f51.google.com [209.85.212.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACC8EE0C86 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 10so1478843vbe.10 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:02:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=x/Wv1QneOkAdRGZLMHKv4lWB0xyo7E6TQQkl+jWc/Pg=; b=aIqN6xTStu8eOjnk6VwSgfWO8ZkzwtO2ra31sYl+9NkLhXs46CJRYsKzJiGZs4C/ZO NlI3RDAATDmEAk7IxO1QvkYPzj2vNm8/hap8ri64i+9JZ5pXgZQp0/VRqWInvXWeVynl zvaI/X6hVXSWLWwbUClQdewvSa1mIYroDWupDx8pBajIZuars7RH8F54/B7gQqAF0h0T fnhkt+EPVmDbC6fY0y1b2dgWsPQ07eAirtWe8g7/NJW5L7n9mICdJ/zn3libUYiUgRKL YNKntyccNTlpcOid8igCs/kRMeTgXLdIXpUfg7umXy6Ow8NfDzdaElwdhPd0uBj1IF9S 9sUQ== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.235.129 with SMTP id um1mr8274202vec.17.1389362566940; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:02:46 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.112.99 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:02:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52cff12f.46d1980a.1fea.32a7@mx.google.com> References: <52ce4eab.463f700a.4b43.16bd@mx.google.com> <52ce9994.24f5980a.0660.342e@mx.google.com> <6345949.JsNcU8lWSX@cschwan-laptop> <52cebfa2.aa78980a.7a02.42e5@mx.google.com> <86r48g8zdc.fsf@moguhome00.in.awa.tohoku.ac.jp> <52cfe7d2.0813980a.6b2c.ffff9681@mx.google.com> <52CFEA1F.8050802@gentoo.org> <52cff12f.46d1980a.1fea.32a7@mx.google.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:02:46 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vQI_rcftgegeeKL_9heIBxcTmAs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage QOS From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 8781b00c-882a-496f-8ed3-002304d4a9cb X-Archives-Hash: 9cc98b56ab6997c91c15ba6c86f880d7 On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Igor wrote: > Hello Patrick, > > Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:39:59 PM, you wrote: > >> Bad code is bad. You can write bad code in any language. > > BTW Perl is faster than Python too. > > Try writing quick sort in Perl, Ptyhon and G++ > > then dump the memory. > > And watch the miracle. I think you're missing the point. If I ask somebody who knows nothing about algorithms to sort a list in Python they're going to use foo.sort(). If I ask somebody who knows nothing about algorithms to sort a list in C they're going to write a bubble sort, and it will be WAY slower for anything more than a dozen elements. Honestly, you're writing as if you're talking to a bunch of people who don't know anything about how computers work, and the reality is that you'll be hard-pressed to find an audience more familiar with compilers/toolchains/linkers/etc just about anywhere. If you have the right algorithm nobody is arguing that it will run faster if compiled from correctly-written C. The problem is that right now we don't have the right algorithm, and we're likely to get a lot further with fixing that faster in a language like python than in C. But, nobody is opposing the work - there are two alternative package managers for Gentoo today, and one of them is full-featured. Neither are written in python. Rich