Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site ada-uts.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!ada-uts!richw
From: richw@ada-uts.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Lisp to C conversion
Message-ID: <10200028@ada-uts.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Dec-85 11:09:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ada-uts.10200028
Posted: Thu Dec  5 11:09:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Dec-85 03:00:22 EST
References: <391@bcsaic.UUCP>
Lines: 18
Nf-ID: #R:bcsaic:-39100:ada-uts:10200028:000:643
Nf-From: ada-uts!richw    Dec  5 11:09:00 1985


"topaz!root"  says:
>> Indeed the most widespread Lisp system that I know of (Utah's Portable
>> Standard Lisp) does more optimization than the most widespread C

Can you be more specific about "more optimization"?
                                ----

"Optimize" is a horrible word for "code-size/execution-time reduction".

Did you ever consider that ALL programs which don't read any input
(e.g. a program to calculate the first 1000 digits of pi) would be,
theoretically, totally consumed by true "optimizing" compilers?

That is, you tell the compiler to optimize your pi-calculating program
and it spews out "3.14159..."

-- Rich Wagner