andrel wrote:

> On 14-11-2009 19:11, nemesis wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>> http://prog21.dadgum.com/52.html
>> 
>> I know that guy, he's from the lambda-the-ultimate web forums. :)  He
>> also mentions magnificent Infocom implementor Brian Moriarty of Trinity's
>> fame, so that's 10 geek points to him.
>> 
>> While he does put the python version to run 1000x over the Basic version,
>> he
>> doesn't acknowledge the difference between 1984 hardware and, say, a P4. 
>> Yes, undoubtedly any interpreted language nowadays is faster than old,
>> line-by-line
>> intepreted Basic, but I guess not by the insane numbers he purports.  Put
>> that qbasic to run that program on the same hardware as Python and let's
>> talk... 5 points taken. :)
>> 
> 
> He was specifically comparing it with his (ours I am afraid) experience
> with 8 bit hardware at *that* time. So you can not take points away for
> that.

Yes, subjectively I think you can appreciate the difference even more. 
Objectively there may be a few defensible arguments that it actually is "not 
that fast".

Oh those days! I still remember thinking "64kb? Who on earth could need 
more!" - a la Bill Gates - and that was when I got my first IBM PC (my Apple 
][ had 16kb at the start, and 48kb later...!)
-- 
Stefan Viljoen

Post a reply to this message