Re: LF: C programming for the TI-92
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: LF: C programming for the TI-92
Steve Benson wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, here's my opinion (I'm sure many people will disagree):
> >
> > I think that all Fargo programs should be written strictly in
> > assembly language. When written in ASM, the programs are very fast,
> > efficient, and don't take up a whole lot of space. When written in
> > C, the same program will be much slower, less efficient, and take up
> > much more space. The only good thing about C programming is that it
> > is relatively easy to program in, but if written in ASM, the games
> > and programs will be much better.
> >
> > -Ed
> >
>
> Once C is compiled it is machine code. Once ASM is compiled it is machine
> code as well. I disagree with you about the speed part. Why would it be
> slower? C is a compiled languege, like ASM, only its higer-level. Yes, a
> compiled C program is probably much larger than an asm one due to many libs
> & stuff, but I say its well worth it. The development of the programs
> themselves would speed up, and that's better than just a few speedy
> programs.
>
> -steve@adverspace.com
Take the BGI for example. Does assembly graphics run as slow as the
BGI? NO!!! It is a matter of coding the libraries, not of the language
it's self. C, its self, is quite efficiently compiled.
References: