[fpc-pascal] another fpc RAD: MSEide

[Florian Klaempfl]

L505 wrote:
> 
>> L505 wrote:
>>> I think this is poor marketing for FPC: telling people that size/bloat is not an
>>> issue.
>>> Then what good is FPC for us? FPC is a compiled language! The whole point of a
>>> compiled
>>> language, is to have SOME advantage over an interpreted language. What is this
>>> advantage,
>>> if not size/memory/footprint? I don't see any advantages.
>> The memory footprint of a good interpreter is lower than that one of a
>> compiled program. Guess why a lot of programs in the 80s were written in
>> interpreted basic :) Only the bad design of most interpreters cause big
>> memory footprint.
> 
> There was also USCD pascal .. but people complained it was too slow?

Yes. That's the drawback :) Ever had a look at the executable size of
the Intel C compiler if you optimize for speed?