Quoting Rowan Crowe to Lawrence Gordon:
 
 RC> For me, seeing a massive executable is somewhat of a turnoff... being
 RC> an ASM  programmer myself I am used to being able to squeeze a lot of
 RC> equivalent  functionality into a much smaller executable.
 
When 64k code and data was all anyone had to work with, size was critical.
These days, size just isn't as important.  If you can write "hello
world" to a exe file in 255 bytes in ASM and it takes 10k in PB, that
doesn't mean that ASM is better or there is anything wrong with PB; it may
only mean that PB might be better suited for other types of applications.
 
 LG> real performance issue in the compiled BASICs is in file i/o, where,
 LG> admittedly, C kicks butt.
 
 RC> Says who? You're generalising here, file I/O in any given compiler
 RC> (regardless  of language) depends on the runtime library.
 RC>
 RC> Have you actually done any tests on this?
 
Yes. About 5 years ago, I did several file i/o comparisons in native
Turbo C v2.01 and PB v2.1 using the runtime libraries of each compiler.
I posted the results in the Intellec PowerBASIC conference.  Unfortunately,
I no longer have the original data, nor the compilers, to run the tests
again.
 
 
 
--- GEcho 1.20/Pro
---------------