Re: [fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

In our previous episode, ? said: > I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled > binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc > one costs nearly no memory? But I still notice it is a little slow. It > usually costs 0.5~1.0 time more than t

Re: [fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

Thank you very much. 2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe : > > On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:53, 章宏九 wrote: > >> 2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe : >>> I would like also to know the situation in C. (I mean declaration of printf and scanf. Are they implemented in glibc or gcc?) >>> >>> In glibc. >> >> Unlike pascal?

Re: [fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:53, 章宏九 wrote: 2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe : I would like also to know the situation in C. (I mean declaration of printf and scanf. Are they implemented in glibc or gcc?) In glibc. Unlike pascal? Yes and no. In both Pascal and C, the internal functionality of the read/

Re: [fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 16:31 +0800, 章宏九 wrote: > Hi. > > I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled > binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc > one costs nearly no memory? But I still notice it is a little slow. It > usually costs 0.5~1.0 ti

Re: [fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe : > > On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:31, 章宏九 wrote: > >> I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled >> binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc >> one costs nearly no memory? > > The FPC run time library is much less extensive th

Re: [fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:31, 章宏九 wrote: I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc one costs nearly no memory? The FPC run time library is much less extensive than the GNU C library (e.g., it does

[fpc-pascal] options for better performance & declaration of system procedures

Hi. I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc one costs nearly no memory? But I still notice it is a little slow. It usually costs 0.5~1.0 time more than the gcc one. It seems as if fpc saves memory