Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!SMOKE.BRL.MIL!info-apple-request From: info-apple-request@SMOKE.BRL.MIL Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: (none) Message-ID: <8905290608.aa16234@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Date: 29 May 89 10:34:35 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 19 Date: 29 MAY 89 11:16- From: Achim Patzner To: INFO-APPLE @ BRL.MIL Subject: P-Systems again ... Date: 29-MAY-1989 11:06:37.10 From: Achim Patzner To: 0::"info-apple@brl.mil" Subj: P-Systems again ... OK, Murph Sewall believes that the speed of a p-sys is enough for him. But think of people working with p-code compilers... All p-code compilers I know of were developed using the "classical" method: A skeleton compiler is written in (p-)assembler, all following versions are compiled with itself until it has all the features it should have. (To be fair, the last p-system I tried out was the Pecan Power System; it was not as slow as I expected it but it was still too slow.) So it is not just the speed of programs which make p-systems unproductive but the speed of compilers. Achim Patzner (PATZNER@DBNINF5.BITNET)