Re: Re: Re: Re: perl2exe - no more secrets

A very good explanation why a "good native compiler" will not be better than the Perl.pl to Perl.exe utilities we already have, can be found in " Why Not Translate Perl to C?".

Except that that explanation is baloney. People have been compiling dynamic languages (such as LISP) for decades. Yeah, it's hard. But it does make programs much faster.

Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: perl2exe - no more secrets

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: perl2exe - no more secrets by CountZero (Bishop) on Feb 24, 2003 at 21:26 UTC
You didn't understand me correctly: I'm not saying that compiled Perl is as fast/slow as interpreted Perl, but that "a good native compiler" will be hard pressed to be faster than Perl compiled with the existing utilities, eg. dump Perl into C and compile this C code. CountZero "If you have four groups working on a compiler, you'll get a 4-pass compiler." - Conway's Law	[reply]