Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!Munich.Germany.EU.net!ibm.de!aixssc.uk.ibm.com!watnews.watson.ibm.com!eclipse!usenet
From: paulward@torolab.vnet.ibm.com (paulward)
Subject: Re: speed of prolog
Sender: usenet@eclipse.torolab.ibm.com (eclipse sysadm)
Message-ID: <PAULWARD.95Jun12173621@skyhawk.torolab.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: alf@sics.se's message of 11 Jun 1995 07:47:24 GMT
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 21:36:21 GMT
Lines: 17
References: <3pam2e$9jh@chuangtsu.acns.carleton.edu> <3pptgj$6do@percy.cs.bham.ac.uk>
	<ROLAND.95Jun7133120@omar.sics.se> <3rbuqb$dru@wing.matsim.udmurtia.su>
	<ALF.95Jun11094724@mut.sics.se>
Organization: IBM Toronto Lab


Thomas> In article <3rbuqb$dru@wing.matsim.udmurtia.su> pvv@wing.matsim.udmurtia.su (Vycheslav V. Pupyshev) writes:
>> Fasterst program is in computer (mashin) code !

Thomas> Yes.

This is not as clear to me.  In principle a programmer can always
write exactly what the compiler produces as an assembler program.  In
practice, it may not be possible.  Today's optimizing compilers can
find optimizations over large ranges of code that no human programmer
could find, and thus write.  So it is not necessarily the case that
the machine code/assembly level will produce the fastest code.
-- 
-- Paul (paulward@vnet.ibm.com)   | A barbarian that requires a justification
DB2/PE Development.               | will use the nearest appealing one.  Blame
Shouldn't there be a shorter word | the barbarian, not his justification for
for the concept "monosyllabic".   | his acts.
