|GCC vs. Turbo C performance email@example.com (1990-11-28)|
|Re: GCC vs. Turbo C performance firstname.lastname@example.org (1990-12-01)|
|In-Reply-To:||email@example.com's message of 28 Nov 90 19:55:00 GMT|
|Date:||1 Dec 90 18:15:28 GMT|
>>>>> On 28 Nov 90 19:55:00 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org said:
Taft> Re: time spent in GCC's "parse" phase.
Taft> ... Turbo C and Think C probably get their speed by doing most of the
Taft> front-end processing while the user is typing in the program.
I don't think so. The compiler runs separately from the editor and really does
read all the source file(s) from disk. I think they get most of their speed
by hand coding a lot of crucial routines in assembly, and by focusing on speed
in designing their compilers. My guess is that they feel it is a market very
sensitive to this issue, and hence worth the effort. (It's also worth the
effort because of the profit and volume.)
J. Eliot B. Moss, Assistant Professor
Department of Computer and Information Science
Lederle Graduate Research Center
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, MA 01003
(413) 545-4206; Moss@cs.umass.edu
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.