Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!ulysses!burl!clyde!akgua!mcnc!idis!george From: george@idis.UUCP (George Rosenberg) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: C "neatener" - another example (#9) Message-ID: <252@idis.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Feb-84 15:26:37 EST Article-I.D.: idis.252 Posted: Tue Feb 21 15:26:37 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 23-Feb-84 01:39:10 EST References: mi-cec.212 Lines: 26 I do not understand the point of this. Your examples are not comparing the C language to the Bliss-32 (or Common Bliss) language. Your examples are comparing the results of two compilers. You are comparing the results of an optimizing compiler to the results of a simple compiler. Both compilers generate target code for the vax. The optimizing compiler is compiling programs written in Bliss-32. The simple compiler is compiling programs written in C. Your target machine is fixed, but both the compiler type and the language vary. Why not make the following comparisons each of which have only one variable? Compare an optimizing Bliss-32 compiler to an optimizing vax C compiler (such as the Amsterdam compiler). Compare a simple vax C compiler to an optimizing vax C compiler. Compare the Bliss-10 pdp-10 compiler to a Bliss-36 pdp-10 compiler. George Rosenberg idis!george