Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ea.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm
From: mwm@ea.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.6809
Subject: Re: BASIC09 floating point faster than C
Message-ID: <7300027@ea.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Nov-84 19:16:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ea.7300027
Posted: Fri Nov 30 19:16:00 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 04:50:30 EST
References: <2314@ihnss.UUCP>
Lines: 18
Nf-ID: #R:ihnss:-231400:ea:7300027:000:679
Nf-From: ea!mwm    Nov 30 18:16:00 1984

/***** ea:net.micro.6809 / uokvax!emjej /  1:05 pm  Nov 29, 1984 */
/***** uokvax:net.micro.6809 / ihnss!knudsen /  9:18 pm  Nov 26, 1984 */
This is so crazy that I'm almost afraid to post it.  It appears that the
same program runs faster in Basic09 than in Microware C (both on a Coco).
/* ---------- */
However, I heartily agree with you: the Microware C floating-point stuff is
REAL SLOW.
					James Jones
/* ---------- */

Let me ask a couple of question: does the Microware C support double (AKA
"long float") variables? If so, do they follow K & R, and *automatically*
convert all float to double?

If you want more reasons not to do floating point in C, just ask.