Path: news.daimi.aau.dk!news.uni-c.dk!sunic!sunic.sunet.se!news.luth.se!eru.mt.luth.se!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!ecl.psu.edu!BJJ
From: bjj@ecl.psu.edu (Bryan J Jensen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.beta
Subject: Re: combining interpreted and compiled beta
Date: 10 May 1995 04:39:56 GMT
Organization: Penn State Engineering Computer Lab
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <3opg2s$12a9@hearst.cac.psu.edu>
References: <3odc7a$dac@belfort.daimi.aau.dk> <wpp.799972391@lise>
Reply-To: bjj@ecl.psu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: ecl.psu.edu

In article <wpp.799972391@lise>, wpp@lise.physik.tu-berlin.de (Kai Petzke) writes:
...a complex example omitted...
>These and other features of BETA make it hard to interprete it
>in a strictly sequential fashion.
>
>The alternative would be to let the interpreter resolve the most
>complicated expressions and declarations, before it executes any
>code.  But this resolution, called "checking" by the Mjolner
>BETA compiler, is a substantial fraction of the total compile
>time.
>
>The resolving interpreter would not be much faster than the
>compiler.

Except you are generating C.  How would the C compilation time
(avoided by an interpreter) compare to the interpreter setup time?