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

robert@metropolis.com (Robert Munyer)
Tue, 25 Aug 1992 08:29:01 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) macrakis@osf.org (1992-08-17)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (1992-08-18)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) imp@Solbourne.COM (1992-08-18)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (1992-08-18)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) pdg@crosfield.co.uk (1992-08-19)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) pk@cs.tut.fi (1992-08-21)
Re: Why is compiled basic slower than C? (Basic is the future) robert@metropolis.com (1992-08-25)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: robert@metropolis.com (Robert Munyer)
Organization: Metropolis Software, Inc.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 08:29:01 GMT
References: 92-08-042 92-08-095
Keywords: interpreter, performance, Lisp

macrakis@osf.org (Stavros Macrakis) writes:
> [...] There are a few cases where Lisp code generates code on the fly,
> then executes it. This is handled by having an interpreter loaded along
> with the compiled code [...]


... or by having a COMPILER loaded along with the compiled code ...


Also, much of the kind of programming that people used to do by generating
and executing code on the fly, is now done instead by using functional
programming and closures. In other words, using "lambda" instead of "eval".


Robert Munyer
robert@metropolis.com
--


Post a followup to this message

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