Carl Friedrich Bolz wrote: > Rocco Moretti wrote: > > Alex Stapleton wrote: > > > >>The question still remains, can it run it's self? ;) > >> > > This allready worked in the past, though it doesn't at the moment. > > > > > > > I think they try, every once in a while, to self host. The only problem > > at this stage of the game is the ~2000x speed slowdown. Using that > > figure, a five second startup time for PyPy on CPython would take about > > 3 hours for PyPy on PyPy on CPython (5s*2000). Running a 1 second (on > > CPython) Python program would take a month and a half for PyPy on PyPy > > on CPython. (1s*2000*2000) > > > > Once they get the speed issue licked, the self hosting problems should > > be no trouble. ;) > > Speed isn't even the biggest problem when running PyPy on itself. PyPy > still 'fakes' some objects, e.g. borrows them from the underlying > Python.
Does it mean You create an RPython object that runs on top of CPython, but is just an RPython facade wrapped around a CPython object? So You have four kinds of Pythons: RPy - translateable into LL code APy - non-translateable but interpretable by translated RPy RPy* - non-translateable but consistent interface with RPy. Calls APy* APy* - not translateable and not interpreteable by translated RPy "Selfhosting" would imply vanishing RPy* and APy*. But the problem seems to be that selfhosting must somehow be broken because the system needs to interact with OS-dependend librarys. As long as You run the system upon CPython the problem does not occur but once You drop it, a kind of "extension objectspace" must be created which is translated into code with nice interfacing properties. Or do You think that RPython translations will be sufficient and another ext-objectspace is just useless epi-cycling? Kay -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list