[fpc-pascal]size/speed/compiler - Was:another fpc RAD: MSEide

Michael Van Canneyt michael at freepascal.org
Wed Apr 19 22:08:18 CEST 2006

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, L505 wrote:

> Okay so we have to now consider these points:
>  1. interpreted languages can take up less memory if engineered right (says Florian)

So can compiled. It depends all on your RTL.

I used such languages.

The interpreted languages Florian talks about had less functionality for you
than the system unit of FPC offers. You could basically add strings and numbers,
and write them to file. That's it.

>  2. compilation and linking is a hassle - compared to shipping or uploading an interpreted
> file

And an interpreter, don't forget.

>  3. speed - not a big deal. Hardware cheap enough.

Speed definitely does matter for some apps: application servers,
database servers etc. So you can't generalize this.

>  4. size - shipping an interpreted file usually smaller than exe/elf

Not if you count the interpreter. Granted, you must download that only once.
This advantage can be had with compiled languages if you have a packages system.

>  5. uploading - uploading a 30K script file on a 56k modem is easier than uploading a 5MB
> binary

Not if you count the interpreter. Try installing Python, perl or PHP, plus
all of the 'packages' you need.

> What advantage of compilation? There must be something.

You know your code is syntactically correct. With interpreted, you don't.


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list