Re: OOS approach revisited

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cl forth 
Sujet : Re: OOS approach revisited
De : zbigniew2011 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (LIT)
Groupes : comp.lang.forth
Date : 26. Jun 2025, 18:27:48
Autres entêtes
Organisation : novaBBS
Message-ID : <c9158c200102c2e508f8ef11deecdc27@www.novabbs.com>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Rocksolid Light
The saving come from rolling  @ @ + ! into a single very specialized
function.  But what about the loading of X Y and retrieving of Z which
are unavoidable in practice?  Should that not be included in the test?
Let's find out then:
1 VARIABLE X
2 VARIABLE Y
3 VARIABLE Z
: TEST1 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO
    I DUP X ! Y ! X @ Y @ + Z ! Z @ DROP
  LOOP LOOP ;
: TEST2 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO
    I DUP X ! Y ! X Y Z +> Z @ DROP
  LOOP LOOP ;
TICKS TEST1 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 252 ok
TICKS TEST2 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 202 ok
: TEST1 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO
    I DUP X ! Y ! 1 X +! 1 Y +! X @ Y @ + Z ! Z @ DROP
  LOOP LOOP ;
: TEST2 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO
    I DUP X ! Y ! X ++ Y ++  X Y Z +> Z @ DROP
  LOOP LOOP ;
TICKS TEST1 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 346 ok
TICKS TEST2 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 258 ok
The difference is smaller - still it's significant.
Another test - using the "drawing a box" example
from "Thinking Forth" (and "simulated" LINE word):
0 VARIABLE TOP
0 VARIABLE LEFT
0 VARIABLE BOTTOM
0 VARIABLE RIGHT
: LINE 2DROP 2DROP ;
: BOX1 ( x1 y1 x2 y2) BOTTOM ! RIGHT ! TOP ! LEFT !
 LEFT  @ TOP    @ RIGHT @ TOP    @ LINE
 RIGHT @ TOP    @ RIGHT @ BOTTOM @ LINE
 RIGHT @ BOTTOM @ LEFT  @ BOTTOM @ LINE
 LEFT  @ BOTTOM @ LEFT  @ TOP    @ LINE ;
: BOX2 ( x1 y1 x2 y2) BOTTOM ! RIGHT ! TOP ! LEFT !
 LEFT  TOP    RIGHT TOP    LINE
 RIGHT TOP    RIGHT BOTTOM LINE
 RIGHT BOTTOM LEFT  BOTTOM LINE
 LEFT  BOTTOM LEFT  TOP    LINE ;
: TEST1 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO  I DUP 2DUP BOX1  LOOP LOOP ;
: TEST2 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO  I DUP 2DUP BOX2  LOOP LOOP ;
TICKS TEST1 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 890 ok
TICKS TEST2 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 653 ok
The difference is even more significant in case
of multiplication:
1 VARIABLE X
2 VARIABLE Y
3 VARIABLE Z
: TEST1 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO
    I DUP X ! Y ! X @ Y @ * Z ! Z @ DROP
  LOOP LOOP ;
: TEST2 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO
    I DUP X ! Y ! X Y Z *> Z @ DROP
  LOOP LOOP ;
TICKS TEST1 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 658 ok
TICKS TEST2 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 200 ok
But this time better implementation has also
its impact; fig-Forth's '*' is inefficient,
and I coded '*>' of course directly in ML,
simply using IMUL.
--

Date Sujet#  Auteur
23 Jun 25 * OOS approach revisited23LIT
24 Jun 25 `* Re: OOS approach revisited22dxf
26 Jun 25  `* Re: OOS approach revisited21LIT
27 Jun 25   +* Re: OOS approach revisited19minforth
27 Jun 25   i+* Re: OOS approach revisited14dxf
27 Jun 25   ii`* Re: OOS approach revisited13minforth
27 Jun 25   ii +* Re: OOS approach revisited3LIT
27 Jun 25   ii i`* Re: OOS approach revisited2minforth
28 Jun 25   ii i `- Re: OOS approach revisited1Stephen Pelc
28 Jun 25   ii `* LOOP (was: OOS approach revisited)9Anton Ertl
28 Jun 25   ii  +* Re: LOOP7dxf
28 Jun 25   ii  i`* Re: LOOP6sean
28 Jun 25   ii  i +* Re: LOOP4Anton Ertl
3 Jul 25   ii  i i`* Re: LOOP3minforth
7 Jul 25   ii  i i `* Re: LOOP2Gerry Jackson
7 Jul 25   ii  i i  `- Re: LOOP1minforth
29 Jun 25   ii  i `- Re: LOOP1dxf
28 Jun 25   ii  `- Re: LOOP (was: OOS approach revisited)1Anton Ertl
28 Jun 25   i+* DO..LOOP and stack shuffling (was: OOS approach revisited)3Anton Ertl
3 Jul 25   ii+- Re: DO..LOOP and stack shuffling1dxf
3 Jul 25   ii`- Re: DO..LOOP and stack shuffling1Anton Ertl
30 Jun 25   i`- Re: OOS approach revisited1Hans Bezemer
27 Jun 25   `- Re: OOS approach revisited1dxf

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal