> hmm. That's under Ultrix 4.5. 
> Under 4.3tahoe, on a KA650 (nominally 2.8 VUPS compared to the 8800's 
> twelve) the same command gets far better time, compiled with pcc2
> (the standard compiler in 4.3tahoe):
Well, 12/2 VUPS. It's a dual-processor machine, and dc can't make use of
the the second processor by obvious reasons :-)

> 
>  14:23:53 osgiliath $ echo "2 9999 ^ 3 6308 ^ / p" | time dc
>  2
>         72.01 real        71.66 user         0.06 sys  
> 
These numbers seems reasonable, yes.

> I just tried under 
> ultrix 4.4 on a vs3100/38 using the dc sources from 4.3tahoe, and vcc 
> crashed on it. cc's output ran in 73 seconds on the 3100/38 , making it 
> somewhat slower than pcc's which did it in 72 on a slower machine... 
Yep, vcc crashes, you must split the file in smaller parts to compile it.
I had to do the same, that's common to do such things when dealing with vcc.

> I think, then, that pcc2 is a better compiler for the VAX than any other 
> (in UNIX at least. anybody have VMS numbers? ) I think ultrix after 4.2 
> got sorta slow.. 
This is the point in using dc: It do not use any system resources so 
the operating system efficiency is irrelevant. 

> where can i find the AT&T sources for dc so that i can use the same 
> version you used? 
> 
It's the same dc as you have; CSRG never changed it.

-- Ragge