Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!midway!quads.uchicago.edu!jcav
From: jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john  cavallino)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: HLLs vs. Assembly
Message-ID: <1991Apr4.185435.28753@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 4 Apr 91 18:54:35 GMT
References: <13202@ucrmath.ucr.edu> <15682@smoke.brl.mil> <13275@ucrmath.ucr.edu>
Sender: bcareful@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 16

One fact that hasn't yet been addressed in this discussion is the existence
of new processor architectures (RISC especially) of such complexity that you
REALLY DO NEED A COMPILER TO WRITE EFFICIENT SOFTWARE.  I'm talking about
things like multi-stage instruction pipelines which must be kept full to
achieve good performance.  What about branch prediction and
register/pipeline interlock, which might involve actually changing the
apparent order of instructions?  Do you really want to have to keep track
of stuff like that, when bunches of very smart people have already written
compilers that will do it for you?  Machine language isn't always the answer,
and I suspect that will become more true in the future.

-- 
John Cavallino                      |     EMail: jcav@midway.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago Hospitals     |    USMail: 5841 S. Maryland Ave, Box 145
Office of Facilities Management     |            Chicago, IL  60637
"Opinions, my boy. Just opinions"   | Telephone: 312-702-6900