Re: I4gl

John Musselman <john@nteltec.com> wrote: >I am finally getting I4gl... I have a problem with string manipulation within >a 4gl program that only C will handle... question is... Is I4gl really a >speed and operational advantage over using R4gl and it's pcode interpreter? >Am I going to be amazed by the speed difference in my programs? First: There is no need to change to compiled 4gl only to be able to link C-Modules, you can obtain this also by linking them with your p-code interpreter (same yields for ACE and PERFORM). Second: What do you expect? What does a database application usually do? Calculate long loops? Probably not. For most p-code statements the CPU interprets, almost as fast as native code, there is Disk I/O to be expected or other things beyond the work of just executing code. But there are advantages over the p-code version: - You can improve the quality of your code by choosing a better C-compiler, - You can manage larger name spaces (there are mystic borders in the p-code version, "Global stack space" and other ugly things for mammoth projects - Load times will improve, at least on Unix Systems which do paging, memory needs will decrease (at least a little bit) Don't overestimate the gain of speed, or you will be disappointed.. And (most important!): Your turnaround cycles will be much slower! Try to mix both compilers, I made best experiences with that solution (developing with r4gl, final compiling and tuning with c4gl - I refuse to use i4gl, I prefer make, what a conservative ;-))). And when it comes to debugging, I hate to debug C when the code I wrote was in 4gl, also an argument for r4gl. Good luck, -svb. -- Sebastian v. Bomhard, +49-89-298934, +49-89-296629 <svb@muc.de> MUC.DE e.V.: IN (Individual Network) in Muenchen >> "Wenn alle Stricke reissen, dann haeng' ich mich auf" -- Nestroy <<