The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Frank Bemelman"
Subject: Re: Which basic compiler to buy?
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:22:50 +0100
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Organization: EuroNet Internet
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Dec 2002 20:23:01 GMT
"John Jardine" schreef in bericht
> Stay clear of the C!. It's an obtuse and unfriendly language having little
> correspondance with good machine code routines.
> It is only pre-eminent nowadays due to it being found to be so awkward to
> use that it was gladly taken up by the colleges and microsoft.
> A normal PC prog' written in classical Basic (not the present C-Basics eg
> VB) can be rewritten or 'broken down' line by line, statement by
> and expanded to a sufficiently detailed level that can translate
> across to a PIC or other micro's machine code . Essentially a Basic
> programme is a line by line, condensed, idealised, equivalent of a machine
> code programme.
> Thus a PIC Basic compiler can be written to make use of this easy
> correspondance between a Basic statement and it's machine code equivalent
> and can be very efficient.
> A 'C' programme and it's strange 'structuring' will not readily do this
> the corresponding PIC 'C' compilers have to go round and round the houses
> to try and provide the same PIC (or another micro) machine code
Who told you that? ;) Not that I'm against BASIC or any other language,
use whatever works for you - but don't complain .
(remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup