Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!esquire!yost
From: yost@DPW.COM (David A. Yost)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.icon
Subject: Re: UUXXCODE
Message-ID: <2665@esquire.dpw.com>
Date: 18 Sep 90 16:13:58 GMT
References: <0093CBF0039A4D60.20400E83@mis.mcw.edu>
Reply-To: yost@esquire.UUCP (David A. Yost)
Distribution: inet
Organization: Davis Polk & Wardwell
Lines: 19

In article <0093CBF0039A4D60.20400E83@mis.mcw.edu> tenaglia@mis.mcw.edu ("Chris Tenaglia - 257-8765") writes:
>
>I've attempted a port to Icon of UUENCODE and UUDECODE.

Now there's a couple of programs I bet are really slow in Icon.
I'd love to see how fast they run with the Icon compiler,
compared to the interpreter and compared to the original
C version.

If the compiler can really do a good job on this sort of repetitive
low-level stuff that kills Icon performance, it would be the dawning
of a new day!  Imagine: we could use Icon instead of C for everything!

Ken, can we see a benchmark on this?

 --dave yost
   yost@dpw.com or uunet!esquire!yost
   Please don't use other mangled forms you may see
   in the From or Reply-To fields above.