Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| Languages of multiple abstaction free4trample@yahoo.com (fermineutron) (2006-10-29) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction Juergen.Kahrs@vr-web.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Kahrs?=) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction gene.ressler@gmail.com (Gene) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction esmond.pitt@bigpond.com (EJP) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction torbenm@app-0.diku.dk (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction bmoses-nospam@cits1.stanford.edu (Brooks Moses) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction free4trample@yahoo.com (fermineutron) (2006-11-04) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2006-11-05) |
| [3 later articles] |
| From: | EJP <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 1 Nov 2006 00:52:54 -0500 |
| Organization: | Melbourne Software Company Pty Ltd |
| References: | 06-10-126 |
| Keywords: | design, performance |
| Posted-Date: | 01 Nov 2006 00:52:54 EST |
fermineutron wrote:
> It is generally the belief that high level languages are slower than
> the low level languages. It seems to me that there are 2 possible
> reasons for it.
There is one very simple reason for it, and that is that the higher the
level of the HLL, the more it conceals the true costs in time and space
of the operations you are encoding in the language. When you're down
near the metal (the silicon) in assembly or some 'LLL' you're very close
to the costs.
APL is the classical example.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.