From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: bob@lintilla.demon.co.uk (Bob Cousins) Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because... Date: 1996/09/05 Message-ID: <322ef1c5.4812560@news.demon.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 178679562 x-nntp-posting-host: lintilla.demon.co.uk references: <31e02c32.342948604@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <4rr961$hdk@btmpjg.god.bel.alcatel.be> <31e180c5.430136383@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <4s4adc$l4a@ecuador.it.earthlink.net> <31EA0B65.3EF8@wgs.estec.esa.nl> <31EF7E48.5ABE@lmtas.lmco.com> <01bb7bfc$3c5ca460$96ee6fcf@timhome2> <838754295.15349.0@lintilla.demon.co.uk> newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Date: 1996-09-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >Bob Cousins says >"That's complete nonsense! One of the design goals of Pascal was >efficient compilation. Every version of Borland Pascal I have used has >been far faster compiling than equivalent C compilers. Historically C >code has run a little faster than Pascal but I am willing to trade a >little run time speed for a better language. >" >The fact that Borland Pascal compiles faster than C says nothing about >the language -- Realia COBOL compiles faster than either of them, but >again that does not say that COBOL is more efficient to compile, just >that the compiler is faster! Ok, I made a slight leap of logic there. But I belive the compiler is faster because the language *can* be compiled faster. I don't believe its all or even mostly due the programmers being better or more money has been spent on optimisation. Just compare Borland C with Borland Pascal on the same platform. I bet Borland C had more resources spent on it too. If you look up N. Wirths design goals for Pascal it was specifically designed to be able to be compiled efficiently because in a teaching environment a lot of one-off compiles are performed. Admittedly Borlands extensions to Pascal are helpful to compiler performance, but the same things (units and symbol files) were built in parts of Modula-2. The design goal of C was to be a language for writing Unix, so it is expected that run-time efficiency is more important than compile speed. Regards, -- Bob Cousins, Software Engineer. Home page at http://www.demon.co.uk/sirius-cybernetics/ Note: Commercial email to bob@lintilla.demon.co.uk will be subject to a $500 handling fee. Sending of such email constitutes acceptance of these terms.