Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!psuvax1!shire!schwartz From: schwartz@shire (Scott Schwartz) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Many people's opinions on computer languages Message-ID: <3945@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu> Date: 17 Sep 88 19:16:38 GMT References: <3938@enea.se> <923@l.cc.purdue.edu> <382@quintus.UUCP> <822@cernvax.UUCP> <929@l.cc.purdue.edu> Sender: news@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu Reply-To: schwartz@shire (Scott Schwartz) Organization: Penn State University Lines: 25 In article <929@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: >In article <822@cernvax.UUCP>, hjm@cernvax.UUCP (Hubert Matthews) writes: >> Herman could then declare i,j : -2**31..2**31-1 and k : -2**63..2**63-1 >> and expect a decent compiler to pick the right machine instructions to do >> >> k := i * j >> >> as a 32*32 -> 64. > >I have seen no decent compilers. In that case, I think our problems are over. All we have to do is come up with the decent compiler that Hubert proposes. I think ADA has all the facilites needed to do a good job, namely operator overloading and the ability to specify range and precision of variables. >In every implementation of C that I have seen, abs is a >subroutine call Ever used a Sun? Sun's C compiler generates three inline instructions for abs(). (see /usr/lib/libm.il) -- Scott Schwartz "... a regular food chain." -- Rayan Zachariassen