P.H.P. and Python (and Tcl/Tk!)

[Yanni Chiu]

phiscock-g851W1bGYuGnS0EtXVNi6w at public.gmane.org wrote:
> 
> When we first started using Tcl/Tk (which is interpreted) , there was a
> significant performance hit in comparison to compiled languages. It was
> worth it, because the speed was (just) adequate and the features and
> convenience of the language were a good fit to our applications.
> Subsequently Tcl/Tk has incorporated various on-the-fly complilations that
> improve the speed without impacting the convenience of an interpreted
> language. We can now do screen updates on our oscilloscope hardware at a
> rate that is indistinguishable from an analog scope.

That should not be a surprise.

     "1993 - Tectronix develops osciliscope line
     using OTI's embedded Smalltalk technology."

(Link: http://www-03.ibm.com/software/ca/en/ottawalab/roots.html)

I still have a 486DX2 from back then. With today's chips,
it should be a breeze - but embedded hardware may be using
low powered chips.

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists