Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!decvax!ima!compilers-sender From: wsmith@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Bill Smith) Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: comparing compilers & architectures Message-ID: <3492@ima.ima.isc.com> Date: 17 Mar 89 03:55:59 GMT Sender: compilers-sender@ima.ima.isc.com Reply-To: Bill Smith Lines: 26 Approved: compilers@ima.UUCP >I see three possibilities for comparing [compilers and systems: > >1. compiler effectiveness >2. architecture effectiveness >3. compiler + architecture effectiveness If you are a software developer, there are at least three additional criteria for comparing systems: 4. Compile-time diagnostic messages and helpfulness 5. Run-time debugging support 6. Support for software engineering These can be then factored into the 3 possibilities mentioned above: to compare the effectiveness of the compiler, OS or the two together. Speed isn't everything, but it is the easiest to measure. Bill Smith wsmith@cs.uiuc.edu uiucdcs!wsmith -- Send compilers articles to ima!compilers or, in a pinch, to Levine@YALE.EDU Plausible paths are { decvax | harvard | yale | bbn}!ima Please send responses to the originator of the message -- I cannot forward mail accidentally sent back to compilers. Meta-mail to ima!compilers-request