Re: OOS approach revisited

From	dxf <dxforth@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: OOS approach revisited
Date	2025-06-24 23:28 +1000
Organization	i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID	<84d259e0f1d6210d84c7840af5d51f4ebdd71ed4@i2pn2.org> (permalink)
References	<fdbeb48de8ceb748d44c67dc3981a566@www.novabbs.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 23/06/2025 3:09 pm, LIT wrote:
> 1 VARIABLE X
> 2 VARIABLE Y
> 3 VARIABLE Z
> 
> : TEST1 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO  X @ Y @ + Z !  LOOP LOOP ; ok
> : TEST2 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO  X Y Z +>  LOOP LOOP ; ok
> TICKS TEST1 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 121 ok
> TICKS TEST2 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 71 ok
> 
> : TEST1 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO  1 X +! 1 Y +! X @ Y @ + Z !  LOOP LOOP ;
> ok
> : TEST2 1000 0 DO 10000 0 DO  X ++ Y ++  X Y Z +>  LOOP LOOP ; ok
> TICKS TEST1 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 217 ok
> TICKS TEST2 TICKS 2SWAP DMINUS D+ D. 132 ok
> 
> '+>' moves a sum of two variables into body of the third one.
> 
> The results are rather promising, from one can see.

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?

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

OOS approach revisited zbigniew2011@gmail.com (LIT) - 2025-06-23 05:09 +0000
  Re: OOS approach revisited dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-06-24 23:28 +1000
    Re: OOS approach revisited zbigniew2011@gmail.com (LIT) - 2025-06-26 17:27 +0000
      Re: OOS approach revisited minforth@gmx.net (minforth) - 2025-06-27 02:16 +0000
        Re: OOS approach revisited dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-06-27 17:29 +1000
          Re: OOS approach revisited minforth <minforth@gmx.net> - 2025-06-27 11:49 +0200
            Re: OOS approach revisited zbigniew2011@gmail.com (LIT) - 2025-06-27 16:55 +0000
              Re: OOS approach revisited albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2025-06-27 20:15 +0200
                Re: OOS approach revisited minforth <minforth@gmx.net> - 2025-06-27 22:35 +0200
                Re: OOS approach revisited albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2025-06-28 11:34 +0200
                Re: OOS approach revisited Stephen Pelc <stephen@vfxforth.com> - 2025-06-28 09:37 +0000
              Re: OOS approach revisited dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-06-28 12:03 +1000
            LOOP (was: OOS approach revisited) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-06-28 10:23 +0000
              Re: LOOP (was: OOS approach revisited) albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2025-06-28 14:26 +0200
              Re: LOOP dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-06-28 22:41 +1000
                Re: LOOP sean@conman.org - 2025-06-28 20:04 +0000
                Re: LOOP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-06-28 21:01 +0000
                Re: LOOP minforth@gmx.net (minforth) - 2025-07-03 19:33 +0000
                Re: LOOP Gerry Jackson <do-not-use@swldwa.uk> - 2025-07-07 07:54 +0100
                Re: LOOP minforth <minforth@gmx.net> - 2025-07-07 10:46 +0200
                Re: LOOP dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-06-29 13:04 +1000
              Re: LOOP (was: OOS approach revisited) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-06-28 16:04 +0000
        DO..LOOP and stack shuffling (was: OOS approach revisited) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-06-28 17:46 +0000
          Re: DO..LOOP and stack shuffling Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2025-07-01 13:53 +0200
            Re: DO..LOOP and stack shuffling dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-07-03 13:59 +1000
            Re: DO..LOOP and stack shuffling anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-07-03 07:50 +0000
        Re: OOS approach revisited Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2025-06-30 15:43 +0200
      Re: OOS approach revisited dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2025-06-27 13:39 +1000

csiph-web