Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf8.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!ut-sally!seismo!cmcl2!acf8!schwrtze
From: schwrtze@acf8.UUCP (E. Schwartz group)
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: WICAT DRYSTONE results and an observation
Message-ID: <7710001@acf8.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Dec-85 23:44:00 EST
Article-I.D.: acf8.7710001
Posted: Thu Dec 19 23:44:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Dec-85 01:28:04 EST
References: <144@wicat.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 12

[eat eat...]
People who write 'C' code like that should consider themselves very
fortunate indeed to have any live dead analysis done on poor code. I
would hope no person would write redundant code like that, of course a code
generator might but I think the WICAT claim is marketing hype to push the
fact of the live dead analysis. It is a good optimisation though.
Just a poor way of showing its true value.

Hedley Rainnie

hedley@alaya
cmcl2!alaya!hedley