Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!sdcsvax!ucbvax!ANDREW.CMU.EDU!rs4u+ From: rs4u+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Richard Siegel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: MPW Pascal versus Lightspeed Pascal: worth it? Message-ID: Date: Mon, 1-Jun-87 14:43:53 EDT Article-I.D.: andrew.oUkQhdy00UhT4q00V5 Posted: Mon Jun 1 14:43:53 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jun-87 01:35:50 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 41 We've had MPW here at work for a while, and this morning, I said what the hell, let's try it. "Trying it" consisted of installing MPW on my hard drive, copying the sources for FzzPlot into a folder under MPW's domain,, and rebuilding FzzPlot from scratch. The results? Four hours later, I said "Never again." The final product produced with MPW Pascal was about 8K smaller than the application produced by Lightspeed Pascal. However, the two applications completed a task (loading a 512-point text file and plotting its data) in the same amount of time, to within a tenth of a second. I would assume that the smaller application size is because MPW strips code on a procedural basis, while Lightspeed Pascal strips code on a library-by-library basis. In any case, I found that the hassle of setting up a makefile, coupled with the long compile and link times, do not make it worth the smaller code size and extra tools (such as PasRef and PasMat) that MPW provides, nice though they be. I'm sticking with Lightspeed Pascal. I see nothing to justify the two megabytes that MPW occupies on my hard drive. Any comments? Please mail directly to me, and I'll summarize for the net. --Rich Richard M. Siegel R-Squared Development Systems 134 Horseshoe Drive Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 (804) 229-2152 [After 6pm eastern time only] Arpanet: rs4u@andrew.cmu.edu Uucp: {your fave gateway}!seismo!andrew.cmu.edu!rs4u Disclaimer? I don't even KNOW 'erer