RE: Major change proposal

Paul Prescod wrote

>"Only a small amount of effort has gone into analyzing the performance 
>of the runtime, mainly due to the lack of performance analysis tools 
>available for .NET. Without such tools, making performance related 
>changes is fruitless, as the effectiveness is difficult to measure."
>
>Jim Hugunin had a few advantages like working with the mature 
>version of 
>the CLR, having already done Jython, etc.

Does anyone know what the current state of the performance analysis tools
for the CLR runtime is?  Am I going to have to be as good as Jim Hugunin to
get Prothon to run fast?

Of course I have one big advantage over ActiveState.  I have an existence
proof.  I know it can be done.

So far I have looked into the CLR architecture and what it looks like is the
Java object model with assembler.  It is hard-wired classes with single
inheritance and interfaces.  All of it is static of course.

At first I thought Python would have an unfair advantage over Prothon in
implementation since Python is class-oriented and CLR is class-oriented, but
then I realized that the same phenomenom that caused me to discover that
Python can do anything that Prothon can do over the last four months is
going to cause Python to have the same implementation difficulties that
Prothon will have in the CLR.  This assumes that IronPython will implement
the full Python capabilities, metaclasses and all.

So far the Prothon implementation looks like a single static object type
which is the fundamental Prothon object.  The actual inheritance and
behavior will all be implemented with methods on that object.

I should first check out how IronPython does it of course.  I assume his
code is open-source.