Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: undroidwish <undroidwish@googlemail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.tcl
Subject: Re: tcl versa python regarding performance
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:59:41 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <v9pl9e$1r907$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v9ggb7$2dcu$1@dont-email.me> <v9lhb6$123t3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9li8g$123t3$2@dont-email.me> <v9ljpk$123t3$3@dont-email.me>
 <v9m3kd$14n4t$1@dont-email.me> <v9mocn$1aus0$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9o5qq$1h866$1@dont-email.me> <v9oc8f$1i6n2$2@dont-email.me>
 <v9p8ra$1pl6h$1@dont-email.me> <v9pcer$1q1o8$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:59:42 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3c1efcc4fcc4c49e50dd8bf6eef17106";
	logging-data="1942535"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/44siprXR1A96rY+fdOD/94NoNMTMGm+U="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3eT2G5U3f8WGi3iNrSfV3SXZojY=
In-Reply-To: <v9pcer$1q1o8$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2082

On 8/17/24 07:28, aotto1968 wrote:

> ...
> I'm "not" complain about TCL bad performance I just mention that PYTHON has
> done much more work on performance than TCL.

Fine, then please elaborate on this claim. What exactly did Python
better and more in terms of performance? Any pointers welcome.

> If you have 300.000 transaction per second (PYTHON) or 200.000 transaction
> per second (TCL) is just an case for someone who need this difference.

Indeed could this be a reason to ask if there are better ways of using
the Tcl framework in order to get the Tcl implementation be on par with
the Python one. As stated many times before, to discuss this on c.l.t.
will require that you provide more implementation details.