Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site kobold.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!kobold!tjt
From: tjt@kobold.UUCP (T.J.Teixeira)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re:  From VMS to UNIX
Message-ID: <184@kobold.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 22-Oct-83 03:18:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: kobold.184
Posted: Sat Oct 22 03:18:34 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Oct-83 03:19:21 EDT
References: <12645@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Organization: Masscomp, Littleton, MA
Lines: 25

On BLISS vs. C:

	Now wait a cotton picken minute.  How can you say that BLISS produces
	better code than C.  That is an entierely implementation dependant
	thing contingient on what machine you are running on, which version of
	the compiler you are using and what level of optimization you are
	asking it to do.

	    -Ron

    Fundamental characteristics of the language have an effect, too. The
    presence of unrestricted GOTO's in C makes it *much* harder to
    implement a really good (read "globally optimizing") C compiler than
    an equivalent BLISS compiler. That's one of the main reasons BLISS
    left them out.

    John T. Wroclawski <JTW@mit-xx>:

Once the compiler is written, I don't care if it was easy to implement
or hard to implement.  There is nothing in the C language that
*prevents* me from writing a compiler as good as the VAX/VMS Bliss
compiler.
-- 
	Tom Teixeira,  Massachusetts Computer Corporation.  Littleton MA
	...!{harpo,decvax,ucbcad,tektronix}!masscomp!tjt   (617) 486-9581