Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Paul Rubin Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Are stack machines inherently faster? Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:31:13 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 15 Message-ID: <87fumndg6m.fsf@nightsong.com> References: <40b9c778-3a98-450b-b65b-6cbaee444921@googlegroups.com> <6a4467c7-1b3b-4e36-b10d-c6a4c98433c6@googlegroups.com> <0ebbb961-6537-4472-8170-f899bd801edb@googlegroups.com> <34e47822-500b-421c-a53d-a9e0fcc1f6ae@googlegroups.com> <87vavld5g6.fsf@nightsong.com> <582ee232.719393556@news.eternal-september.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e3ea742ecf16cb514721309f0067cdcc"; logging-data="5377"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Hps4jgfi3mBugyhldgg5r" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:d0xXPbxutTYLz1JUC4q5Il/HKf8= sha1:dq1cV4hXgQ3DrytL2vWXoGNCrfY= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:52729 "HAA" writes: > What happens when 1.5 seconds is not good enough? Discard Forth for > C? That's not unreasonable either. CPU, clock, language, facilities, > I rank greater than compiler technology. Get those wrong and it won't > matter whether it's DTC or NCC. I have to wonder what kind of hardware Stephen's client was running DTC Forth on. If it's old enough then a 10x or more speedup might be had by just upgrading it. VFX code output should run at comparable speed to the output of a decent C compiler. A fancy optimizing C compiler might get a little more speedup, but the next thing to pursue is more likely parallelism, GPU's, etc. That assumes that the algorithm is already decent, the existing host PC is reasonably fast by today's standards, etc.