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: