Re: COBOL compiler
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 19:35, Britton wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:25:55AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
[snip]
> This just isn't true. Perl at least is brought to its knees by a variety
> of problems that C has no trouble with whatsoever. I've had simple
> pixel-crawling image processing algorithms take a day to run in Perl, when
> I rewrote in C about 30 seconds. And that's with PDL (admittedly PDL call
> overhead was I think the major thing slowing perl down, but that's hardly
> reassuring). The scripting languages just aren't anywhere near as fast as
> the older, simpler, compiled ones. Its not that I don't still write first
> drafts of many codes in perl, its just that now I budget time to rewrite
> them in C if I need to (its still usually faster overall to prototype
> first in perl, even if you know you are doomed speed-wise). I don't know
> if perl and cobol have the same relationship, or if there are common
> business tasks that still need the speed, but it seems like a definite
> possibility.
You might want to try Python as a prototyping, and even implementation,
language. It has many graphics libraries that are coded in C for
speed. Thus, you get the benefits of a VHLL plus a LLL (low level
language) when speed is needed.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
4 degrees from Vladimir Putin
Reply to: