Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:23119 comp.sys.mac.programmer:3218
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!endor!siegel
From: siegel@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Lightspeed Pascal 2.0 Ships!
Message-ID: <622@husc6.harvard.edu>
Date: 21 Nov 88 14:28:49 GMT
References: <594@husc6.harvard.edu> <24515@sri-unix.SRI.COM>
Sender: news@husc6.harvard.edu
Reply-To: siegel@endor.UUCP (Rich Siegel)
Organization: Symantec/THINK Technologies, Bedford, MA
Lines: 38

In article <24515@sri-unix.SRI.COM> larson@unix.sri.com (Alan Larson) writes:
>
>Does the new Lightspeed Pascal 2.0 still have the problem with dealing
>with the most negative integer as a data value? 

	What "problem" is that?

>Does it have real packing of data when it is byte size 
	No, but a future 2.x update probably will.

>Does it add an 'unsigned' data type modifier

	No. 


>Most important of all, how much of a Mac does it take to run it? 
	The minimum configuration is one MB, two 800K floppy drives.

>How much slower is it than 1.11?

	Why does it have to be slower? As it happens, the editor is faster,
the code generated is considerably faster (sorry, no quantitative
measurement, but I think the Sieve is about twice is fast), and the compiler,
which does two passes now instead of one pass, is about 10% faster.

		--Rich



Rich Siegel
Staff Software Developer
THINK Technologies Division, Symantec Corp.
Internet: singer@endor.harvard.edu
UUCP: ..harvard!endor!singer
Phone: (617) 275-4800 x305

Any opinions stated in this article do not necessarily reflect the views
or policies of Symantec Corporation or its employees.