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.