On Nov 21, 2007 2:34 PM, "S.J.Chun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For me, the squeak environment - image - is not problem; but the performance > is my main obstacle to use it for main development. If squeak can show more > than 90% > of performance of C in every case(this is important part, for some limited > area it might > already performant), for me, squeak is best choice. I hope PEPSI/COLA/etc > could help > me to solve this problem - performance, raw performance. Without this, I > think that > the language or development environment cannot be universal tool like C. > (Yes, I know > human productivity/performance is more valuable but productive, performant > and fast > language is better than productive one with moderate speed, isn't it?)
To me, it depends. If speed is fully acceptable for 90% of my use-cases then I'd happily combine that productivity gain with a lower-level language for the other 10% because then I'm still many times more productive than with just C. Of course, this isn't very nice, either, and it would be much better if the programming language had some kind of mode to describe highly efficient code (same syntax, but a few restrictions) or to let the compiler do a very deep optimization (whole-program analysis?) for some parts of your code where speed really matters. Just a thought. I'm not a compiler developer, so I don't know how much of this is possible. Bye, Waldemar Kornewald _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
