From: arne@vajhoej.dk   
      
   On 4/8/2025 8:20 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:   
   > On 2025-04-06, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:   
   >> On 4/4/2025 2:00 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:   
   >>> 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.   
   >   
   > It's a lot more complicated than that.   
   >   
   > For example, take a LL(1) RD parser. Even ignoring the processing   
   > of the results from the parser, how much code (and how much effort)   
   > do you think it would take to implement it in Macro-32 compared to C ?   
      
   Still not obvious to me that it would not follow normal LOC/FP   
   ratios.   
      
   Effort is a different issue. If someone said:   
      
   x1.6 LOC   
   x16 hours for initial write of code   
   x160 hours for maintenance of code   
      
   then I would consider it likely.   
      
   It has been hinted a few time that the DCL code is not easy to   
   understand and modify.   
      
   Arne   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)