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: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 19:13:06 +0100 Organization: none Message-ID: <0001HW.266801B201266708700009A5738F@news.individual.net> References: <5afvagd0g4uajs1ji35v3lorkgb2kd56qu@4ax.com> <87wnrkf9pr.fsf@nightsong.com> <37c582bb-3012-4954-a26c-5d9614ac0c84n@googlegroups.com> <0001HW.2664183000DCDBDE700005E5438F@news.individual.net> <87k0nff07k.fsf@nightsong.com> <0001HW.2665B79F01080BFC700005E5438F@news.individual.net> <87fsy2febp.fsf@nightsong.com> <0001HW.2666503201136FD9700005E5438F@news.individual.net> <877djdfs8h.fsf@nightsong.com> <0001HW.2666F48E011A97D0700009A5738F@news.individual.net> <52640622-179a-40d3-a0c1-da113a8984f2n@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 IbgCUAnk4+QAdjm9ENl33AFqfSP2u9s3CrJFsH5UgYEjcGlAZa X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:BCvMDAFWJSqFuNwmmitjMePtxEo= User-Agent: Hogwasher/5.24 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:62093 List-Id: On 2 Jun 2021, John Perry wrote (in article<52640622-179a-40d3-a0c1-da113a8984f2n@googlegroups.com>): > On Tuesday, June 1, 2021 at 6:04:49 PM UTC-5, Bill Findlay wrote: > > On 1 Jun 2021, Paul Rubin wrote > > (in article <877djdf...@nightsong.com>): > > > Bill Findlay writes: > > > > > > The 20KSLOC compiler ran on a 1.5MIPS machine. > > > > > Yes, but 1) 20KSLOC per what unit of time, > > > > > > Ok, but that's maybe 5x slower than Turbo Pascal, which compiled 1000s > > > of LOC per second on machines of that class. > > Well that is not what emerged in the conversation I reported. > > The details are vague now, the gist was that the 1977 compiler > > on comparable machines was several times faster that Turbo. > > May I ask what is meant by "comparable machines"? Machines that ran other programs at about the same speed, I specifically had in mind the Whetstone and the Ackermann function benchmarks. > Here's why I ask: it can't have been a machine based on the Intel 8088, > because that wasn't available until 1979. The 20KSLOC/min compiler ran on an ICL 1906S, which had a Whetstone rating of ~800 KWIPS. > > I see no point in pursuing this further. > > I can understand, and I apologize if I shouldn't have asked, but I am > genuinely curious about what was meant. I hope you don't mind. I don't mind, it's just that I thought the lack of concrete data makes further discussion a bit pointless. -- Bill Findlay