[pjmlp]

The damage that Python not having a JIT has done.

At least BASIC was designed for native code compilation from day one, and after the 8 bit home computers generation passed by, getting compilers for 16 bit home computers was rather easy.

30 years later, people insist in using bytecode interpreted language for the wrong use cases.

[abdulhaq]

What about psyco? Anyway it's a very odd take that the early development of python should have been concerned with a jit. There were many far more pressing issues at the time.

[pjmlp]

Python exists for 33 years....

[abdulhaq]

Yes and I've been using it for a lot of that time. Maybe you too. At the time tools like psyco were useful but never got enough traction to persuade core developers that it was a compelling direction. It never felt like an obviously wrong decision.

[pjmlp]

I only use it as Perl alternative for UNIX scripts, nothing else, unless forced otherwise.

There are enough alternatives with the same dynamism and native code generation.