Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers

dmr@alice.att.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Tue, 2 Nov 1993 04:51:31 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[20 earlier articles]
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers synaptx!thymus!daveg@uunet.UU.NET (Dave Gillespie) (1993-10-29)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers rfg@netcom.com (1993-10-30)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers qualtrak@netcom.com (1993-10-30)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers johnson@cs.uiuc.edu (1993-10-31)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1993-10-31)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers drraymon@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca (1993-11-01)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers dmr@alice.att.com (1993-11-02)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers steven.parker@acadiau.ca (1993-11-02)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers pardo@cs.washington.edu (1993-11-03)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers kanze@us-es.sel.de (James Kanze) (1993-11-03)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers vthrc@mailbox.uq.oz.au (Danny Thomas) (1993-11-05)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers lenngray@netcom.com (1993-11-07)
Re: Folk Theorem: Assemblers are superior to Compilers rfg@netcom.com (1993-11-13)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: dmr@alice.att.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Keywords: C, performance, assembler
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
References: 93-10-104 93-10-129
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1993 04:51:31 GMT



The only time I recall remarking in print on the relative performance of
assembler vs. C was in the BSTJ `Retrospective' paper of 1978:


    Compared to the benefits, the costs of using
    a high-level language seem negligible...the object
    programs seem somewhat larger.... It is hard to
    estimate the average increase in size, because in
    rewriting it is difficult to resist the opportunity
    to redesign....A typical inflation factor for a
    well-coded C program would be about 20 to 40 percent.
    The decrease in speed is comparable, but can sometimes
    be larger, mainly because subroutine linkage tends to
    be more costly....


    The above guesses of space and time inflation for C
    programs are not based on any comprehensive study.


This waffles, but I don't disavow it. I especially stand by the next
part:


    Although such a study might be interesting, it would
    be somewhat irrelevant, in that no matter what the
    results turned out to be, they would not cause us
    to start writing assembly language. The operating
    system and the important programs that run under it are
    acceptably efficient as they are.


That was 1978, this is 1993, folks.


Dennis Ritchie
--


Post a followup to this message

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