From: oreillym@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Michael O'Reilly) Subject: Re: ALPHA-pl11 available on nic: C++ support Date: 13 Jul 1993 02:38:45 GMT
Warner Losh (imp@boulder.parcplace.com) wrote:
: In article <21s0gm$q5n@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> oreillym@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Michael O'Reilly) writes:
: >it runs about 1/2 the speed of optimized C. (due to f**king
: >spectacular compiler tech). And it doesn't run on linux. :(
: Hmmm, I wonder what C compiler they were comparing it against. There
: are some C compilers that really suck and others that generate stellar
: code. Does self handle realtime things well, or do you get
: unpredictable response times when GC kicks in?
Comparision is vs GCC as far as I know. I would have to re-check the
papers for that tho..
re GC. Good question. As far as I know the GC times are pretty minor. They
quote some nice GC rates. GC is mostly irelevent. The GC is fairly
seperate from the language itself, so bolting on an incremental GC'er
is no problem (as far as I am aware...)
: >C++ is pretty un-paletable.. (sp?). The worst features of C combined
: >with the worst features of OO programing.
Michael.