When Synchronet is binarily compiled from C what language does it use? Is it Assembler?
The Millionaire wrote to All <=-
When Synchronet is binarily compiled from C what language does it
use?
Is it Assembler?
C++ can run like machine language? No program cannot run efficiently like machine language can.
Re: Re: Synchronet BBS Compiling
By: The Millionaire to Gamgee on Sat Nov 30 2019 07:37 pm
I've often heard it said that hand-optimized assembly code can run faster than code compiled from a higher-level language like C or C++. But compilers have optimizations, and I've heard that modern compilers these days are pretty good at generating machine code that's as optimal as possible from the source language.
Are you going to want to write all your software in assembly language? ;)
Nightfox
---
â– Synchronet â– Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
The Millionaire wrote to Gamgee <=-
C++ can run like machine language? No program cannot run
efficiently like machine language can.
In the olden days most software was written in Assembler. It was the standard back then for all the commercial games and whatnot.
Are you going to want to write all your software in assembly language? ;)
files. Even a program written in Assembler is compiled by a
compiler for that language. I don't think you actually understand
this.
Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-
files. Even a program written in Assembler is compiled by a
compiler for that language. I don't think you actually understand
this.
I once said something similar to one of my assembly instructors
in college, and he corrected me saying an assembly program is
"assembled" rather than being compiled. I think compiling refers
to the process of converting a higher-level language (such as
C/C++ etc.) into machine code, and assembly is already pretty
much machine code.
Absolutely correct. I think I was subconsciously over-simplifying
things in an attempt to get 'TM' to grasp it.
Full disclosure on my programming skill set - the last time I was
actually semi-seriously (hobby-level) programming, I was using
Borland's Turbo Pascal in MSDOS... :-) But I do know that
Borland also made a product called Turbo ASM.
... Windows 3.1 - From the people who brought you EDLIN.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.10-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
The Millionaire wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Absolutely correct. I think I was subconsciously over-simplifying
things in an attempt to get 'TM' to grasp it.
Full disclosure on my programming skill set - the last time I was
actually semi-seriously (hobby-level) programming, I was using
Borland's Turbo Pascal in MSDOS... :-) But I do know that
Borland also made a product called Turbo ASM.
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
Ummmmmmm...... No.
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
Ummmmmmm...... No.
We all know it was written in MS BASIC.
Netsurge wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
Ummmmmmm...... No.
We all know it was written in MS BASIC.
Paul Quinn wrote to Netsurge <=-
And some C+- (Pronounced "C More or Less").
Paul Quinn wrote to Netsurge <=-
And some C+- (Pronounced "C More or Less").
You'd take the integer variable C, evaluate it, add 1 and subtract 1, giving
you C. You forgot the trailing semicolon...
I just had a flashback to the C class I took last century.
Netsurge wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Turbo Pascal is what Windows is written with.
Ummmmmmm...... No.
We all know it was written in MS BASIC.
Unlike C++, C+- is a subject-oriented language.
You'd take the integer variable C, evaluate it, add 1 and subtract 1, giving you C. You forgot the trailing semicolon...
Paul Quinn wrote to Netsurge <=-
And some C+- (Pronounced "C More or Less").
You'd take the integer variable C, evaluate it, add 1 and subtract 1, giving you C. You forgot the trailing semicolon...
I just had a flashback to the C class I took last century.
Unlike C++, C+- is a subject-oriented language.
Each C+- class instance, known as a subject, holds
hidden members, known as prejudices or undeclared
preferences, which are impervious to outside messages,
as well as public members known as boasts or claims.
The following C operators are overridden as shown:
better than< worse than
<< forget itway better than
! not on your life
== comparable, other things being equal
I thought Borland's compilers were fairly popular in the early 90s. I remember them being fairly inexpensive, and I remember hearing a lot about Borland Turbo C and Borland Turbo C++ for DOS.. Also I seem to remember hearing that Borland's OWL GUI toolkit for C++ was at least somewhat popular for a time in the early-mid 90s.
Don't forget the "goes to" operator. For example:
ag!
for (int i = 10; i --> 0; i--)
Basically, with i starting at 10 and goes to 0.
Microsoft C was *the* platform for coding on x86 at the time, and Turbo Pascal only wrote <64k .com files and their related overlays...
I thought Borland's compilers were fairly popular in the early 90s.
I remember them being fairly inexpensive, and I remember hearing a
lot about Borland Turbo C and Borland Turbo C++ for DOS.. Also I
seem to remember hearing that Borland's OWL GUI toolkit for C++ was
at least somewhat popular for a time in the early-mid 90s.
Yes, and yes. Microsoft C was the professional choice, Borland Turbo Pascal and C were geared to hobbyists and students.
Microsoft C didn't have an IDE back then, you needed to use a programmer's editor like Brief, and they had hooks into the compiler - so they could open the editor at the error encountered.
Turbo Pascal is still available; it's amazing how tiny the executable and libraries are.
Re: Re: Synchronet BBS Compiling
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Nightfox on Thu Dec 05 2019 05:31 pm
I thought Borland's compilers were fairly popular in the early 90s.
I remember them being fairly inexpensive, and I remember hearing a
lot about Borland Turbo C and Borland Turbo C++ for DOS.. Also I
seem to remember hearing that Borland's OWL GUI toolkit for C++ was
at least somewhat popular for a time in the early-mid 90s.
Yes, and yes. Microsoft C was the professional choice, Borland Turbo Pascal and C were geared to hobbyists and students.
Microsoft C didn't have an IDE back then, you needed to use a programmer's editor like Brief, and they had hooks into the compiler - so they could open the editor at the error encountered.
Ah, interesting. I didn't use the software development tools much back then, but I heard about some of them.
Turbo Pascal is still available; it's amazing how tiny the executable and libraries are.
Interesting.. I thought Borland's Turbo Pascal morphed into Delphi? Or perhaps that's something different?
Nightfox
Sysop: | sneaky |
---|---|
Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
Users: | 21 |
Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
Uptime: | 190:21:01 |
Calls: | 1,781 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 11,046 |
Messages: | 927,811 |