Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future)

Hao-yang Wang <hywang@apple.com>
Wed, 12 Aug 1992 18:20:55 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) Glenn_Johansson@f313.n203.z2.fidonet.cd.chalmers.s (1992-08-11)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) jch@rdg.dec.com (1992-08-12)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) hywang@apple.com (Hao-yang Wang) (1992-08-12)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) maniattb@cs.rpi.edu (1992-08-12)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) macrakis@osf.org (1992-08-12)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) scott@bbx.basis.com (1992-08-13)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) macrakis@osf.org (1992-08-14)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (1992-08-14)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) dbenn@leven.appcomp.utas.edu.au (1992-08-15)
[8 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.basic
From: Hao-yang Wang <hywang@apple.com>
Organization: Compilers Central
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 18:20:55 GMT
References: 92-08-042
Keywords: Basic, C, performance

1. The "ON ERROR GOTO..." statement, as well as other "ON ... GOTO..."
statements, is not easy to implement in a compiled environment.


2. To support the strings in BASIC, we need (a) a heap, (b) some garbage
collecting or reference counting technique. These will introduce some
overhead in memory management.


These language features are not unique to BASIC. And we can see that the
implementations of any languages with these features can hardly beat the
implementations of C in execution efficiency.


Hao-yang Wang
Pai Technology, Inc
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.