Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 18:53:11 -0500
From: Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 00:53:11 +0100
Message-ID: <2012102800531128996-chrishinsley@gmailcom>
References: <2012102715594849117-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <201210271603106615-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <dd0589f1-d982-4279-a3d3-b4cb7b5aea8d@s14g2000vba.googlegroups.com> <1315f2d4-5da9-42dc-af23-d7d7a9f9018b@l12g2000vbj.googlegroups.com> <2012102719252825860-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <ecfb2d6f-3b61-4361-8cfa-fd3361c8fb81@b19g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: well formed flag ?
User-Agent: Unison/2.1.9
Lines: 40
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-scjZtzbxaTm52ZOFAcEatv/wgfnSdczxWef/iQA92wm76k8cBnfOksrWTmoJCO9LvnnlIQA253+Vjdk!FShkSWeuwNt+/c3QdXupi1b1K+VfijeO8+lLvi/EI+Qw4pBHhklXXjJbbhH82zdTQXksmrM=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2698
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:16794

On 2012-10-27 22:08:25 +0000, Alex McDonald said:

> On Oct 27, 7:25 pm, Chris Hinsley <chris.hins...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> : < ( 2 -- 1 )
>>>> \ ' nseopt compiles; code=$4014DF len=16 type=1
>>>> \ defined in src\kernel\gkernel32.f at line 564
>>>> ( $0 )    mov     edx eax                           \ 8BD0
>>>> ( $2 )    or      ecx $-1                           \ 83C9FF
>>>> ( $5 )    xor     eax eax                           \ 33C0
>>>> ( $7 )    cmp     dword { $0 ebp } edx              \ 395500
>>>> ( $A )    cmovl   eax ecx                           \ 0F4CC1
>>>> ( $D )    add     ebp $4                            \ 83C504
>>>> ( $10 )   ret                                       \ C3 ( end ) ok
>> 
>>>> EAX is top of stack, EBP is the stack pointer and { EBP } is next to
>>>> top.
>> 
>>         defword "<", 0, WORD_LT, WORD_INLINE_COMMA
>>         cmp [ebp], ebx
>>         setl bl
>>         sub ebp, byte 4
>>         movzx ebx, bl
>>         neg ebx
>>         ret
>>         defword_end
>> 
>> This is shorter at 14 bytes rather than 16 ! ;)
>> 
>> Chris
> 
> Yes, but it may run slower.

Not sure about that, its 1 instruction less, and should probably 
shedule ok on a modern micro op x86 design. Only hard benchmarks would 
tell. I'll probably leave it as that for now, better than what I had.

Regards

Chris