C68 Compiler Benchmarks

Authors

Publication

Pub Details

Date

Pages

See all articles from QL Hacker's Journal 6

In QHJ #3, I reported on some benchmarks that I ran on Lattice C and Small-C. Now that I had C68, I decided to run the benchmarks against it to see how it compares with the other two compilers.

Here is how all three compilers compare:

Prime NumbersSmall-CLattice CC68
29000-327675 Sec3 Sec6 Sec
1000-3276732 Sec20 Sec42 Sec
Recursion189 Sec193 Sec227 Sec

As it turns out, C68 seems to be the slowest compiler on all of the benchmarks. Since C68 was written for a variety of systems, it’s optimzer may not be tweaked for the QL.

If you have any applications that are speed dependent you might be better off using Lattice C. For porting software from MS-DOS or UNIX to the QL, C68 is the way to go. Also C68 provides full QDOS support, whereas Lattice C provides only access to traps (you have to write your own functions to utilise the traps).

Not having the time to really get into C, I still find Small-C good enough for my uses. Small-C’s compiler is hands-down the fastest of the three.

Products

 

Downloadable Media

 

Image Gallery

Scroll to Top