Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!purdue!decwrl!labrea!agate!saturn!ucscd.UCSC.EDU!biling
From: biling@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (Doug Rosener)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard
Subject: Re: Compiled HC code
Keywords: even slower!
Message-ID: <6655@saturn.ucsc.edu>
Date: 12 Mar 89 00:30:36 GMT
References: <5966@bsu-cs.UUCP> <990@taurus.BITNET> <75141GFX@PSUVM> <4634@charon.unm.edu>
Sender: usenet@saturn.ucsc.edu
Reply-To: biling@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (Doug Rosener)
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; CATS
Lines: 22

In article <4634@charon.unm.edu> stone@hydra.unm.edu.UUCP (Andrew Stone CS.DEPT) writes:
>
>I bought CompileIt at MacWorld Expo. It took it 30 minutes to compile this line
>of code:
>
>put X + (cos(theta)) into newX
>
>That was the entire function. The XFCN generated operates at at half the speed 
>of the normal hypertalk code! That is, the XFCN takes twice as long!
>
>You decide if its worth $99 or whatever dollars.

I'm probably wrong, but I think you did the worst test possible.  If you
only compile one command, then you will see mainly the overhead costs.

However, if you took a large number of commands and compiled them, the 
savings begins to outweigh the time in executing the XFCN

You probably tried this, but compiled code usually runs faster than
interpreting.

Doug Rosener