3 ms·

I'm pretty sure it was Multiplan and not Excel that used the p-code approach. Also, when Lotus 1-2-3 shipped, it was written entirely in assembly, was blazing f

I'm pretty sure it was Multiplan and not Excel that used the p-code approach. Also, when Lotus 1-2-3 shipped, it was written entirely in assembly, was blazing fast, and crushed Multiplan in the marketplace.

gcp 12y ago
It was Excel that used p-code. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000007.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000007.html
- rogerbinns 12y ago
  Relevant except from that page: The Excel team's ruggedly independent mentality also meant that they always shipped on time, their code was of uniformly high quality, and they had a compiler which, back in the 1980s, generated pcode and could therefore run unmodified on Macintosh's 68000 chip as well as Intel PCs. The pcode also made the executable file about half the size that Intel binaries would have been, which loaded faster from floppy disks and required less RAM.
- localhost 12y ago
  Thanks. Looks like both Multiplan[1] and Excel were p-code. However, Multiplan was wiped out by 1-2-3, and Excel ... adapted (it certainly isn't p-code today or anytime in recent history). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplan
  - gcp 12y ago
    Ironically, ironically... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_1-2-3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_1-2-3 (Decline) "The inability to fit the larger code size of compiled C into lower-powered machines forced the company to split its spreadsheet offerings, with 1-2-3 release 3 only for higher-end machines, and a new version 2.2, based on the 2.01 assembler code base, available for PCs without extended memory. By the time these versions were released in 1989, Microsoft was well on its way to breaking through Lotus' market share"
- 101914 12y ago
  Their motto was "Find the dependencies -- and eliminate them."

3 ms·

I'm pretty sure it was Multiplan and not Excel that used the p-code approach. Also, when Lotus 1-2-3 shipped, it was written entirely in assembly, was blazing f

by localhost 12y ago

gcp 12y ago
It was Excel that used p-code. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000007.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000007.html
- rogerbinns 12y ago
  Relevant except from that page: The Excel team's ruggedly independent mentality also meant that they always shipped on time, their code was of uniformly high quality, and they had a compiler which, back in the 1980s, generated pcode and could therefore run unmodified on Macintosh's 68000 chip as well as Intel PCs. The pcode also made the executable file about half the size that Intel binaries would have been, which loaded faster from floppy disks and required less RAM.
- localhost 12y ago
  Thanks. Looks like both Multiplan[1] and Excel were p-code. However, Multiplan was wiped out by 1-2-3, and Excel ... adapted (it certainly isn't p-code today or anytime in recent history). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplan
  - gcp 12y ago
    Ironically, ironically... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_1-2-3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_1-2-3 (Decline) "The inability to fit the larger code size of compiled C into lower-powered machines forced the company to split its spreadsheet offerings, with 1-2-3 release 3 only for higher-end machines, and a new version 2.2, based on the 2.01 assembler code base, available for PCs without extended memory. By the time these versions were released in 1989, Microsoft was well on its way to breaking through Lotus' market share"
- 101914 12y ago
  Their motto was "Find the dependencies -- and eliminate them."