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=-1.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 28 May 93 06:41:49 GMT From: netnews!schonberg!dewar@nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: VERDIX KISSES OFF ADA Message-ID: List-Id: "If it [Turbo-Ada] is to compete with Turbo-Pascal, it had better be written in hand coded assembler" I think that's a wrong conclusion. In fact I think that Turbo-Pascal is disappointingly slow given the fact that it operates in memory and is written in assembler. I would think it should be ten times faster than it is under these conditions. My hand coded scanner and parser for Ada runs at nearly 3,000,000 lines a minute on a top end PC, so I would certainly think that a complete compilr (generating pretty straightforward code, as TP does) should be able to achieve 500,000 - 1,000,000 lines/minute. Another point of comparison is that Turbo-Pascal is not significantly faster than Realia COBOL, but the latter compiler is written entirely in COBOL and is a six pass compiler that definitely does *not* keep everything in memory (in fact even the symbol table is on disk, though of course these disk files are in practice buffered in avaiolable memrory wheere possible).