Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!overload!dillon From: dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: NorthC and BYTE sieve demo Message-ID: Date: 1 Mar 91 18:34:58 GMT References: <46088@nigel.ee.udel.edu> Organization: Not an Organization Lines: 30 In article <46088@nigel.ee.udel.edu> GKZ117@uriacc.uri.edu (F. Michael Theilig) writes: >On 27 Feb 91 10:30:25 GMT (Stewart C. Russell said: > I believe the newest version of NorthC has much better screen output. > I'm not really sure. I'd have to try it out again. > Actually, I think that the screen output speed is more of a factor of > the libraries being linked in. As ZC, DICE, and PDC all use amiga.lib, > it's my guess that there isn't going to be much of a difference between > them. SAS also. NorthC uses it's own replacement for amiga.lib and > the consequence is speed. Please correct me if I'm wrong. >-------- > F. Michael Theilig - The University of Rhode Island at Little Rest > GKZ117 at URIACC.Bitnet Well, it depends how complete the other compilers are, the main factor in screen output is buffering. When outputting to the screen, line buffering is normally used. When redirecting to a file, full buffering is normally used. Using amiga.lib has nothing to do with it, there is no way to get around having to eventually call Write() to write to a file handle (e.g. Output()). What does matter is how often you make the call (e.g. buffering used, if any). -Matt -- Matthew Dillon dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US 891 Regal Rd. uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon Berkeley, Ca. 94708 USA