Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!ncar!csn!kessner!david From: david@kessner.denver.co.us (David Kessner) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Computer Architecture question -- Daye Haynie Message-ID: <1991May19.195257.3375@kessner.denver.co.us> Date: 19 May 91 19:52:57 GMT References: <1991May15.112823.22229@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1991May19.123429.19440@sugar.hackercorp.com> Organization: Kessner, Inc. Lines: 25 In article <1991May19.123429.19440@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >ALWAYS use the highest level language available that can get the job done. >-- >Peter da Silva. `-_-' >. Ahem! Wouden't it be more correct to say: "ALWAYS use the highest language available that can get the job done efficently" I remember a certain co-worker that used a high level language/compiler when writing a paper eject program (all it did was send a form feed to the printer). The executable file was 150K! I then re-wrote it in C, and made it a whole lot more functional/flexable. My executable was less than 10K. Now, both programs did the job. However, the lower level language did it better... -- David Kessner - david@kessner.denver.co.us | 1135 Fairfax, Denver CO 80220 (303) 377-1801 (p.m.) | Reunite PANGEA! Why can't everyone have three or four line .sig's? |