Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| 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] |
| 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
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.