Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!clyde.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!samsung!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!noao!arizona!dave From: dave@cs.arizona.edu (Dave P. Schaumann) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: How are some programs SO DAMN SMALL! Message-ID: <865@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> Date: 14 Feb 91 21:44:22 GMT References: <1991Jan20.210328.18087@hoss.unl.edu> <28077.279c3c3f@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <91042.125712UH2@psuvm.psu.edu> <91042.134209J56QC@CUNYVM.BITNET> cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes: |In article mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) writes: | In article <91045.150604GUTEST8@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be> Ives Aerts writes: | |Example: I just spent 30 seconds turning out a "hello world" program | |in a language chosen to 1) be portable, and 2) generate small | |executables. The executable is 20 bytes long. How small is your best | But this is VERY hard to believe.. [...] I'll second that. | And you do it by choosing the right language. [...] |I'm afraid he means that he used BASIC to write it. [...] Is this true? It is very dishonest to claim the size of a (uncompiled) BASIC program is just the size of the file holding the program. It is really the size of the program + the size of the interpreter. I noticed that the original poster neglected to mention which language he used, rather deliberately to my reading of it. If it's BASIC, he's busted big time. If it's not, I think he owes us all the name of the language, and specific implementation details (ie, version, vendor, optimizer switches, etc.). -- Dave Schaumann | DANGER: Access holes may tear easily. Use of the access | holes for lifting or carrying may result in damage to the dave@cs.arizona.edu | carton and subsequent injury to the user.