From: clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP   
      
   On 2025-04-11, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:   
   > On 4/8/2025 1:27 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:   
   >> On 2025-04-08, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:   
   >>> On 4/8/2025 8:20 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> 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.   
   >>   
   >> Try implementing one, especially with a reasonably sized grammar, and   
   >> you will very rapidly understand that it is not as simple as you seem   
   >> to think it is. :-)   
   >   
   > I have not made any claim about it being simple.   
   >   
   > I have made a claim that the ratio for LOC/FP for Macro-32   
   > and LOC/FP for C for such a problem would not be significantly   
   > different from other application types.   
   >   
      
   That claim is clearly incorrect.   
      
   The amount of Macro-32 code required for something higher-level such   
   as a RD parser that can be concisely expressed in C compared to assembly   
   language is clearly greater than, say a device driver, where the device   
   access and programming sequence is the same regardless of whether it   
   is done in C or assembly language.   
      
   You cannot even optimise the register access sequence in a C device driver   
   to reduce the amount of code, (and you even have to use volatile variables   
   so the compiler doesn't do it for you behind your back.)   
      
   >>> 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.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> As I mentioned above, this is no longer about DCL. I picked the above   
   >> standalone example, a LL(1) RD parser, because it's a really good example   
   >> of the different scale of effort involved in writing it in Macro-32   
   >> instead of in C.   
   >   
   > I have not made any claim about effort either.   
   >   
   > Are you sure that you have understood the topic??   
   >   
      
   Yes, but it's not clear if you have Arne.   
      
   Simon.   
      
   --   
   Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP   
   Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)