Screw it. Let’s actually make python script an ISA that gets run on physical hardware with no higher level tooling. Then we can have the python virtual environment which runs this for fools who don’t have the right hardware. Finally, when people start complaining about naming we make Python Script 2.1, which is a JIT language built on top of IL that looks nothing like either of them but can emulate both python and python script with the performance cost of being a quarter as fast as both.
Honestly if someone irons out the edge cases, python probably could JIT compile to machine code via cython. It would take a fair bit of memory and probably a bit slow on low powered systems but it would be so much faster if cached.
Technically I think python already has an intermediate step that it uses before it starts running a script that compiles it into a lower-ish language (at least the cpython interpreter does this, it probably isn’t a part of the language specification though)
The actual line between JIT languages and interpreted languages is pretty thin since I think most interpreted languages do something similar to minimize the amount that needs to be done at runtime
Screw it. Let’s actually make python script an ISA that gets run on physical hardware with no higher level tooling. Then we can have the python virtual environment which runs this for fools who don’t have the right hardware. Finally, when people start complaining about naming we make Python Script 2.1, which is a JIT language built on top of IL that looks nothing like either of them but can emulate both python and python script with the performance cost of being a quarter as fast as both.
Honestly if someone irons out the edge cases, python probably could JIT compile to machine code via cython. It would take a fair bit of memory and probably a bit slow on low powered systems but it would be so much faster if cached.
Technically I think python already has an intermediate step that it uses before it starts running a script that compiles it into a lower-ish language (at least the cpython interpreter does this, it probably isn’t a part of the language specification though)
The actual line between JIT languages and interpreted languages is pretty thin since I think most interpreted languages do something similar to minimize the amount that needs to be done at runtime
I think at this point in time it JIT compiles into byte code and cached which is more efficiently interpreted the next time that function is called.