Re: well formed flag ?

Path	csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!nerim.net!novso.com!news2.euro.net!postnews2.euro.net!news.wanadoo.nl!not-for-mail
From	mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix)
Subject	Re: well formed flag ?
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Message-ID	<19761907938435@frunobulax.edu> (permalink)
Date	Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:59:16 +0200
References	<1538109.deQg0ZcWqx@sunwukong.fritz.box>
X-Newsreader	iForth 2.0 console (October 21, 2006)
Lines	37
Organization	Wanadoo
NNTP-Posting-Date	28 Oct 2012 15:59:15 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host	s529d937f.adsl.online.nl
X-Trace	1351439955 dr5.euro.net 236 82.157.147.127:58798
X-Complaints-To	abuse@wanadoo.nl
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.forth:16808

Show key headers only | View raw

Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes Re: well formed flag ?

> Stephen Pelc wrote:
>> The important comparison is the number of hours spent on the
>> code generators for C and Forth.

> IMHO VFX is limited on x86 by the numbers of registers.  As are C 
> compilers.  When I wrote my Wurstkessel cryptography core, Marcel did 
> compare the C compiler result with iForth on x64, where more registers 
> are available, and the speed was about the same.

I redid these just now on an i7 2.66 GHz machine:

64bits - 0.985 seconds; Speed: 518,743,667 bytes/sec. 
32bits - 2.981 seconds; Speed: 171,696,847 bytes/sec. ( rngs_wurst in CODE )
32bits - 4.741 seconds; Speed: 107,971,320 bytes/sec. ( high-level )

> On x86, Andy Glew (one of the designers of the Pentium Pro) suggested 
> adding an instruction for "well formed flags" in the Forth sense - which 
> could be used for bit-wise operations.  It got turned down by senior 
> management, because C compilers couldn't make any benefit from it; 
> though assembly code would.

Rngs_wurst is in CODE because the carry bit is needed.

	: rngs_wurst ( ud1 index -- ud2 )  
	    64s ( 8 * ) 'rngs + 64@ 
	    2>R
	    DUP 0< >R D2* R> DUP D- 2R>
	    ROT XOR >R XOR R> ; PRIVATE

> Later, in the SSE instruction set, the idea was revived, and indeed 
> implemented: SSE compares store their result flags as either all bits 
> set or all bits cleared in the destination register.

-marcel

Thread

well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 15:59 +0100
  Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 16:03 +0100
    Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 08:33 -0700
      Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 09:06 -0700
        Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 09:26 -0700
          Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:33 +0100
            Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:38 +0100
            Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 12:52 -0700
              Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 21:01 +0100
                Re: well formed flag ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-27 22:18 +0200
                Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-28 04:19 -0400
        Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 17:44 +0100
          Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-27 14:52 -0400
            Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:06 +0100
        Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 19:25 +0100
          Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 19:33 +0100
          Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 15:08 -0700
            Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 00:53 +0100
  Re: well formed flag ? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 09:31 -0700
    Re: well formed flag ? "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-10-27 19:21 +0200
      Re: well formed flag ? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 10:33 -0700
        Re: well formed flag ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-27 22:21 +0200
        Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-28 12:33 +1100
          Re: well formed flag ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-27 15:46 -1000
  Re: well formed flag ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-27 08:54 -1000
    Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:11 +0100
  Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-28 11:05 +1100
    Re: well formed flag ? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-28 11:53 +0000
      Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 14:17 +0100
        Re: well formed flag ? mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-10-28 16:59 +0200
          Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 18:37 +0100
        Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-29 23:46 +1100
          Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-29 08:33 -0500
            Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-29 08:25 -0700
              Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-29 12:27 -0500
                Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-30 08:18 -0700
                Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-30 10:33 -0500
                Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-30 08:48 -0700
                Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-30 11:45 -0500
                Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-30 20:10 +0100
                Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-30 15:10 -0700
                Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-30 18:28 -0700
                Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-11-02 05:28 -0700
                Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 08:13 -0700
                Re: well formed flag ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-30 12:50 -1000
                Re: well formed flag ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 14:57 +0000
                Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-31 17:58 +0100
                Re: well formed flag ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 17:39 +0000
                Re: well formed flag ? David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2012-11-16 23:21 -0500
                Aliasing (was: well formed flag ?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 14:03 +0000
                Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 12:06 -0400
                Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 09:31 -0700
                Aliases (was: well formed flag ?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 17:02 +0000
                Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 20:06 -0400
      Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-29 23:47 +1100
        Re: well formed flag ? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-30 18:02 +0000
          Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-31 11:44 +1100
            Re: well formed flag ? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-31 09:25 +0000

csiph-web