Admittedly, I think this Micropython port is seemingly more targeting a Mac Plus, whilst I suspect the original Mac Python would probably prefer a Quadra (or a PowerMac).
One detail that I'd be interested to see are startup times for the MicroPython environment. Having compiled both Lua and Duktape (an embedded friendly ES7 runtime) for a Macintosh Classic, morally a Plus, I regularly got startup times of up to a minute - I think most of it due to the sheer size of the resulting binaries and standard libraries.
That's a useful comparison since it gives some insight to some important differences: part of the difference might be an order of magnitude increase in clock speed (say from 15 MHz to 133+ MHz); another might be an increase in I/O speed. A final one might be memory pressure - classic Mac OS applications conservatively specified memory to reserve in advance since they shared the same memory space, and a lot of purging/reloading of nonessential relocatable resources might be happening.
REXX was an okay enough language for the time, but the real benefit was not needing to install a compiler -- which required more memory typically than my Amiga had, IIRC.
Meanwhile in college everyone had the 486 chip that could fit in a 386 socket. And I would have bought one, but I was broke. I ended up getting a pentium system with 64MB of ram that ran Linux after my first job.
Admittedly, I think this Micropython port is seemingly more targeting a Mac Plus, whilst I suspect the original Mac Python would probably prefer a Quadra (or a PowerMac).
https://github.com/micropython/micropython/issues/8420
REXX was an okay enough language for the time, but the real benefit was not needing to install a compiler -- which required more memory typically than my Amiga had, IIRC.
Meanwhile in college everyone had the 486 chip that could fit in a 386 socket. And I would have bought one, but I was broke. I ended up getting a pentium system with 64MB of ram that ran Linux after my first job.