From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Bill Findlay Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: why the pascal family of languages (Pascal, Ada, Modula-2,2,Oberon, Delphi, Algol,...) failed compared to the C family? Date: Sun, 30 May 2021 20:00:00 +0100 Organization: none Message-ID: <0001HW.2664183000DCDBDE700005E5438F@news.individual.net> References: <5afvagd0g4uajs1ji35v3lorkgb2kd56qu@4ax.com> <87wnrkf9pr.fsf@nightsong.com> <37c582bb-3012-4954-a26c-5d9614ac0c84n@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net mGYLXywZjfm2uQm16VVKtQPQQtmuqx/ha8q2XLruEPMCH993qm X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:+LXOI3IixAcbF722I65r8nI0sfE= User-Agent: Hogwasher/5.24 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:62052 List-Id: On 30 May 2021, Luke A. Guest wrote (in article ): > On 28/05/2021 14:28, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > > > Otherwise yes, it was pretty fast, much faster than MS-DOS C/C++ > > Apparently, they were fast because the Turbo compilers didn't do > optimisations due to the limitations of the machines. > > > compilers of the time, Borland's own C++ including. They were fast only by comparison with very slow compilers. I remember, around 1987, someone telling me in astonishment that Turbo ran at 2KSLOC/minute. I was unimpressed, as I had worked on a compiler that ran at 20KSLOC/min a decade earlier. -- Bill Findlay