L505 wrote: > >> L505 wrote: >>> I think this is poor marketing for FPC: telling people that size/bloat is >>> not an >>> issue. >>> Then what good is FPC for us? FPC is a compiled language! The whole point >>> of a >>> compiled >>> language, is to have SOME advantage over an interpreted language. What is >>> this >>> advantage, >>> if not size/memory/footprint? I don't see any advantages. >> The memory footprint of a good interpreter is lower than that one of a >> compiled program. Guess why a lot of programs in the 80s were written in >> interpreted basic :) Only the bad design of most interpreters cause big >> memory footprint. > > There was also USCD pascal .. but people complained it was too slow?
Yes. That's the drawback :) Ever had a look at the executable size of the Intel C compiler if you optimize for speed? _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
