From: arne@vajhoej.dk
On 4/4/2025 2:00 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2025-04-03, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 4/3/2025 2:15 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2025-04-01, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> He looks at size 6.2 -> 7.2 -> 8.2 -> 9.2 and .mar vs .c 6.2 -> 9.2.
>>>>
>>>> https://vmssoftware.com/resources/blog/2025-03-31-how-big-is-vms/
>>>
>>> How the hell does DCL have 30,000+ lines of code ? :-)
>>> (Even allowing for the fact most of it is in Macro-32)
>>
>> Just for fun I downloaded bash and counted. 117 KLOC.
>>
>
> Wow. I had no idea it was now that big. OTOH, bash has got a _lot_ more
> functionality in it than DCL does.
6 times more?
>>> Also, regarding those BLISS/Macro-32 figures across the various modules
>>> in general, I wonder how much smaller the code would have been if it had
>>> been written in C ?
>>
>> C is a relative high LOC/FP language.
>>
>> Most LOC/FP tables have C in the 100-125 range and macro-assembler
>> in the 200-250 range.
>>
>> If we adjust for VAX instructions being more powerful/complex
>> than average ISA, add a random number and subtract wind speed I
>> will estimate the Macro-32 / C ratio to be around 1.5-1.75.
>>
>> If you buy that then the DCL 33 KLOC would be 19-22 KLOC in C
>> to be compared with bash 117 KLOC.
>>
>
> The problem with that analysis is what DCL does.
>
> It basically parses, validates, and executes commands it has been given.
> That is something which can be implemented a lot more easily and concisely
> in a HLL with abstracted data structure capabilities (which includes
> even C) than an assembly language with no such capabilities.
It is not obvious to me that:
(LOC/FP for Macro-32) / (LOC/FP for C)
is a lot higher for a shell than for the average application - data
structures are not anything special for shells.
But maybe.
Arne
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
