On 2024-02-26 10:13:52, Kautuk Consul wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On 2024-02-26 10:02:55, Kautuk Consul wrote: > > On 2024-02-23 15:04:56, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 11:29:23AM +0530, Kautuk Consul wrote: > > > > > > difference (e.g. by running the command in a tight loop many times)? > > > > Running a single loop many times will not expose much because that loop > > > > (which is NOT within a Forth colon subroutine) will compile only once. > > > > In my performance benchmarking with tb@ I have put 45 IF-THEN and > > > > IF2-THEN2 control statements that will each compile once and reveal the > > > > difference in compilation speeds. > > > > > > All of this is only for things compiled in interpretation mode anyway. > > > Even how you get the source code in (read it from a slow flash rom in > > > the best case!) dominates performance. > > > > > > You do not write things in Forth because it is perfect speed. Write > > > things directly in machine code if you want that, or in another high- > > > level language that emphasises optimal execution speed. The good things > > > about Forth are rapid prototyping, immediate testing of all code you > > > write, simple compact code, that kind of goodness. Ideal for (system) > > > firmware! > > > > > > > > > Segher > > > > Yes, but SLOF will be there on the product we sell to our customers. > > Considering that there is a noticeable improvement in performance I just > > thought maybe IBM management would be interested in it. > > On this note, what did you also try to understand the performance > implications of my patch ? What improvements did you observer on your > set up? One strange thing I noticed is that when I copy paste the same IF-THEN or IF2-THEN2 lines below the ones that I already have in my OF.fs, the timebase seems to keep reducing for some strange reason. The number of IF-THEN and IF2-THEN2 statements are the exact same.
