|
|
|
|
|
by hwpythonner
410 days ago
|
|
That's a great question!
I actually thought a lot about that early on. In theory, you could build a CPU that directly interprets Python bytecode — but Python bytecode is quite high-level and irregular compared to typical CPU instructions.
It would add a lot of complexity and make pipelining much harder, which would hurt performance, especially for real-time or embedded use. By compiling the Python bytecode ahead of time into a simpler, stack-based ISA (what I call PySM), the CPU can stay clean, highly pipelined, and efficient.
It also opens the door in the future to potentially supporting other languages that could target the same ISA! |
|