cinder VS Cwerg

Meta is actually contributing directly to upstream cpython. If you really wanted to, the internal fork is also open source: https://github.com/facebookincubator/cinder

Just one example: last year Meta open-sourced Cinder, which powers Instagram and provides sizeable speedups compared to CPython.

I used to work on the Cinder JIT and can help document any passes you find interesting or confusing.

You might enjoy Cinder then. It's based on CPython so it is nearly 100% compatible.

https://github.com/facebookincubator/cinder/

Disclaimer: I used to work on it.

I think Cinder's Static Python, which also performs runtime type checking, is more ambitious. Though it's not production ready yet.

Here's a fork that implements that https://github.com/facebookincubator/cinder - it might be nice to one day get that up streamed but obviously it'll be controversial and it certainly needs more time to bake. Hopefully at some point we can make it a pip installable extension though.

The other thing that was interesting to me, was the potential of type annotations to help make for a faster, safer experience on the compiler end of things. One example is seen in Meta’s Cinder project, on the docs it explains how typing can be used to reduce the number of steps for the compiler ([cinder/static_python.rst at cinder/3.8 · facebookincubator/cinder · GitHub](https://github.com/facebookincubator/cinder/blob/cinder/3.8/CinderDoc/static_python.rst)), making it more effective.

Perhaps these have already been dealt with and I'm missing critical information. If so, my apologies. Great work, in any case.

[1] https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/FrontEnd#dis...

Cwerg has backend that can be used as JIT and is written with readability in mind. Additional documentation can be found here: https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/Docs

I defined a basic ISA-like IR for Cwerg. It has unlimited registers and no constraints on immediates.

entire compiler front end ast nodes

I was also going down the path of bike shedding concrete syntax for my language Cwerg before pulling the plug on that effort and just using s-exprs. I managed to make the s-expr quite succinct by carefully choosing the order of arguments so I can omit optional ones. Also very helpful was to use square brackets for list, e.g. (call fun-name [arg1 arg2]). This simplifies parsing a little bit and is easier on the eye. Here are some Code Examples

I am iterating over the languages features for Cwerg's Frontend which aims to be a low level language with about the complexity of C but with some of the comforts of modern languages. I am especially happy with the choice of adding sum types. Relative to C the current feature set looks like this: Removed: * arrays decay to pointers * bitfields * separate compilation (more of a backend issue) * pre-processor * varargs * implcit type conversions * (untagged) unions * ++/-- * comma operator * implicitly nullable pointers * goto