Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #42102 > unrolled thread

Problem with GForth

Started bylehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
First post2015-09-21 11:09 -0700
Last post2015-10-09 00:30 -0700
Articles 16 on this page of 36 — 11 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 11:09 -0700
    Re: Problem with GForth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-21 20:14 +0200
      Re: Problem with GForth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-21 12:36 -1000
        Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 16:20 -0700
          Re: Problem with GForth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-22 02:37 +0200
            Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 22:59 -0700
            Re: Problem with GForth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-21 20:04 -1000
      Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 16:17 -0700
        Re: Problem with GForth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-22 02:35 +0200
      Re: Problem with GForth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-21 23:30 -0700
      Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 18:33 -0700
        Re: Problem with GForth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-07 19:03 -0700
        Re: Problem with GForth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-08 07:45 +0000
          Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 05:06 -0700
            Re: Problem with GForth Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-10-08 14:24 -0700
              Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:49 -0700
                Re: Problem with GForth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 23:11 -0700
            Re: Problem with GForth Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-10-09 01:01 +0200
              Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:53 -0700
                Re: Problem with GForth Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-10-09 10:04 +0200
                  Re: Problem with GForth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 01:23 -0700
                    Re: Problem with GForth Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-10-09 12:32 +0200
            Re: Problem with GForth "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-08 23:34 +0000
              Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:55 -0700
            Re: Problem with GForth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-08 16:52 -0700
              Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 23:03 -0700
              Re: Problem with GForth Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-10-09 10:21 +0200
                Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 08:04 -0700
              Re: Problem with GForth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-10 11:03 +0000
                Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-13 12:34 -0700
              Re: Problem with GForth Marcos Cruz <use_the_contact_page@programandala.net> - 2015-10-13 18:31 +0000
                Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-13 12:40 -0700
                  Re: Problem with GForth Marcos Cruz <use_the_contact_page@programandala.net> - 2015-10-14 20:20 +0000
            Re: Problem with GForth "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-09 05:58 +0000
              Re: Problem with GForth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 23:08 -0700
              Re: Problem with GForth mhx@iae.nl - 2015-10-09 00:30 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#42486

FromPaul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-09 01:23 -0700
Message-ID<87zizs4fho.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>
In reply to#42484
Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> writes:
>   time gforth BigIntANSForth.txt bignum.txt -e bye

Could you try with gforth-fast ?  Thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42488

FromCoos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl>
Date2015-10-09 12:32 +0200
Message-ID<ld8octzb47t$.29c44sjlfkhj$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#42486
Op Fri, 09 Oct 2015 01:23:47 -0700 schreef Paul Rubin:

> Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> writes:
>>   time gforth BigIntANSForth.txt bignum.txt -e bye
> 
> Could you try with gforth-fast ?  Thanks.

VBOX linux 64 gforth-fast Intel E800 dual core 3 GHz
real	0m0.487s
user	0m0.284s
sys	0m0.056s

VBOX linux 32 gforth-fast Intel E800 dual core 3 GHz
real	0m1.249s
user	0m0.756s
sys	0m0.016s

Native Linux 64 gforth-fast Intel E800 dual core 3 GHz
real	0m0.304s
user	0m0.235s
sys	0m0.012s

Raspberry Pi B gforth-fast single core 700 MHz
real	0m8.831s
user	0m8.660s
sys	0m0.060s

Native Linux 32 gforth-fast AMD single core 2 GHz
real	0m1.397s
user	0m1.388s
sys	0m0.000s

groet Coos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42468

From"WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com>
Date2015-10-08 23:34 +0000
Message-ID<mv6ui3$21i$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#42453
lehs wrote:

> b**mod
> 
> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.

Oforth:

26359783991551070871965201979080333254038743646746158379582192038055842791146833506745978666309678710238746262325665407448047112858614221184120023774728850927701745782077979943165434355776993447809155163506304287949484786229043007193369097865681445643720004387345872800008950502312482268122160708155160328564

39327375191467048647521018841730348998598651522372708158670691892420060531890655533991461398550696324722351925617448324344083141484661951392820800479947685042791549748743564268081958080246132723174581232969062661990556972176861792341905425252382562697686127413259201904144867482279552760624394742040590855602
*
16306675630939784626502807161425612212340131109932460322238576590610976549235432503764166590338557086651302692446204937053886057954003032814801648230668894753863150108029570966337696939560565101312815273803547555619029325583815565767168841836143511237512006023630352590540140638620838094344583215840893265550
mod .

18875585843095877685500588004186838163395520143424196938333413803253607047916746
24893524194742736032385552977823936790502523349098436298392980714946980144235027
01110303270864299823231785949654652195884003800042700123513278977017863166309354
0743844851635921996900242066366526285950489819498094257843804010578 ok

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42474

Fromlehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 22:55 -0700
Message-ID<c3b3235f-9465-415c-832c-6fbddf961956@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42468
The routine b**mod ( a b c -- d ) calculates d=a^b (mod c).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42470

FromPaul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-08 16:52 -0700
Message-ID<87lhbc6hpu.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>
In reply to#42453
lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> writes:
> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
> [ three 1022-bit operands ]    b**mod
> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.

Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus, and
with other Forth implementations.  I might try with gforth-fast and
Mecrisp (ARM) when I have some time.  Should I expect it to work on
16-bit systems?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42476

Fromlehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 23:03 -0700
Message-ID<f1318fd4-f0d0-47bf-bb0f-97e8360bc60a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42470
I hope it could be made faster though.
Yes, I would expect it to run on 16 bit systems. But some problems might appear in some systems, on any kind.

And, there might still be errors in the code, which is a mix of established algorithms and home brewed 'algorithms'.

The factoring routines works for 20 digit numbers - at the best.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42485

FromCoos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl>
Date2015-10-09 10:21 +0200
Message-ID<14n4qfmxwbxfe.1vv7t5l20ckvk$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#42470
Op Thu, 08 Oct 2015 16:52:45 -0700 schreef Paul Rubin:

> lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> writes:
>> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
>> [ three 1022-bit operands ]    b**mod
>> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
> 
> Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
> interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus, and
> with other Forth implementations.  I might try with gforth-fast and
> Mecrisp (ARM) when I have some time.  Should I expect it to work on
> 16-bit systems?

It does not run on my current CHForth 16. 
$A000 allocate and more is really too much!
Perhaps working with extra segments (8086) could work,
but then you have to use long addresses.

Nit: don't expect that CELL exists. CELL+ and CELLS do.

groet Coos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42503

Fromlehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-09 08:04 -0700
Message-ID<767b34cf-2097-479e-b1ea-8af16af2cba3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42485
Den fredag 9 oktober 2015 kl. 10:21:46 UTC+2 skrev Coos Haak:
> Op Thu, 08 Oct 2015 16:52:45 -0700 schreef Paul Rubin:
> 
> > lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> writes:
> >> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
> >> [ three 1022-bit operands ]    b**mod
> >> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
> > 
> > Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
> > interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus, and
> > with other Forth implementations.  I might try with gforth-fast and
> > Mecrisp (ARM) when I have some time.  Should I expect it to work on
> > 16-bit systems?
> 
> It does not run on my current CHForth 16. 
> $A000 allocate and more is really too much!
> Perhaps working with extra segments (8086) could work,
> but then you have to use long addresses.
> 
> Nit: don't expect that CELL exists. CELL+ and CELLS do.
> 
> groet Coos
No, I didn´t think about that aspect. The stack memory had to be reorganized and resized. It would be better to use a separate file with source code.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42545

Fromanton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Date2015-10-10 11:03 +0000
Message-ID<2015Oct10.130320@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
In reply to#42470
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> writes:
>> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
>> [ three 1022-bit operands ]    b**mod
>> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
>
>Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
>interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus, and
>with other Forth implementations.

gforth-fast on a Core i7-4790K (running at 4.4GHz thanks to Turbo mode):
real    0m0.117s
user    0m0.112s
sys     0m0.000s

vfxlin 4.71 on the same machine
real    0m0.117s
user    0m0.112s
sys     0m0.000s

Strange.   Let's see what the performance counters say:

perf stat -e instructions:u -e cycles:u vfxlin-4.71 "include /nfs/nfstmp/anton/VfxLinEval-4.71/Lib/Ndp387.fth include bench.fs" >/dev/null
        1041236122      instructions:u            #    2.08  insns per cycle        
         499547195      cycles:u                 

       0.116635759 seconds time elapsed

perf stat -e instructions:u -e cycles:u /localtmp/anton/gforth/gforth-fast bench.fs >/dev/null
        1595291884      instructions:u            #    3.14  insns per cycle        
         507562915      cycles:u                 

       0.117390969 seconds time elapsed

While VFX executes fewer instructions, apparently the dependencies are
such that this does not result in significantly better performance for
this benchmark.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2015: http://www.rigwit.co.uk/EuroForth2015/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42623

Fromlehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-13 12:34 -0700
Message-ID<cb669f1f-e294-4e1b-a903-822bf100ead9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42545
Den lördag 10 oktober 2015 kl. 13:26:16 UTC+2 skrev Anton Ertl:
> Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
> >lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> writes:
> >> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
> >> [ three 1022-bit operands ]    b**mod
> >> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
> >
> >Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
> >interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus, and
> >with other Forth implementations.
> 
> gforth-fast on a Core i7-4790K (running at 4.4GHz thanks to Turbo mode):
> real    0m0.117s
> user    0m0.112s
> sys     0m0.000s
> 
> vfxlin 4.71 on the same machine
> real    0m0.117s
> user    0m0.112s
> sys     0m0.000s
> 
> Strange.   Let's see what the performance counters say:
> 
> perf stat -e instructions:u -e cycles:u vfxlin-4.71 "include /nfs/nfstmp/anton/VfxLinEval-4.71/Lib/Ndp387.fth include bench.fs" >/dev/null
>         1041236122      instructions:u            #    2.08  insns per cycle        
>          499547195      cycles:u                 
> 
>        0.116635759 seconds time elapsed
> 
> perf stat -e instructions:u -e cycles:u /localtmp/anton/gforth/gforth-fast bench.fs >/dev/null
>         1595291884      instructions:u            #    3.14  insns per cycle        
>          507562915      cycles:u                 
> 
>        0.117390969 seconds time elapsed
> 
> While VFX executes fewer instructions, apparently the dependencies are
> such that this does not result in significantly better performance for
> this benchmark.
> 
> - anton
> -- 
> M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
> comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
>      New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
>    EuroForth 2015: http://www.rigwit.co.uk/EuroForth2015/

I suppose it was Linux?

OBS! There was a typo in the barrett reduction word 'barmod' that caused a lot of errors for small numbers, but more rare errors for sufficiently big numbers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42620

FromMarcos Cruz <use_the_contact_page@programandala.net>
Date2015-10-13 18:31 +0000
Message-ID<mvjim0$3tu$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#42470
En/Je/On 2015-10-08, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
escribió/skribis/wrote:

>> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
>> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
>
> Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
> interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus

Raspberry Pi 2 (900MHz quad-core ARM Cortex-A7) (*):

----
$ time gforth-fast BigIntANSForth.txt  bignum.txt -e bye
redefined rdrop  redefined .r  redefined s>f  redefined f>s

real    0m6.122s
user    0m6.090s
sys     0m0.010s
----

(*) http://programandala.net/en.computer.raspesis.0x07.html [:)]

-- 
Marcos Cruz
http://programandala.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42624

Fromlehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-13 12:40 -0700
Message-ID<9951baeb-4ff1-42c9-a991-557051733a19@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42620
Den tisdag 13 oktober 2015 kl. 20:31:32 UTC+2 skrev Marcos Cruz:
> En/Je/On 2015-10-08, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
> escribió/skribis/wrote:
> 
> >> https://github.com/Lehs/BIG-INTEGER-ANS-FORTH
> >> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
> >
> > Nice!  That's fast enough to be useful for some purposes.  I'd be
> > interested in seeing measurements with gforth-fast on various cpus
> 
> Raspberry Pi 2 (900MHz quad-core ARM Cortex-A7) (*):
> 
> ----
> $ time gforth-fast BigIntANSForth.txt  bignum.txt -e bye
> redefined rdrop  redefined .r  redefined s>f  redefined f>s
> 
> real    0m6.122s
> user    0m6.090s
> sys     0m0.010s
> ----
> 
> (*) http://programandala.net/en.computer.raspesis.0x07.html [:)]
> 
> -- 
> Marcos Cruz
> http://programandala.net

Windows?

As I wrote above: There was a typo in the barrett reduction word 'barmod' that caused a lot of errors for small numbers, but more rare errors for sufficiently big numbers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42641

FromMarcos Cruz <use_the_contact_page@programandala.net>
Date2015-10-14 20:20 +0000
Message-ID<mvmdf2$agf$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#42624
En/Je/On 2015-10-13, lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> escribi'o/skribis/wrote:

>> Raspberry Pi 2 (900MHz quad-core ARM Cortex-A7) (*):
>> 
>> ----
>> $ time gforth-fast BigIntANSForth.txt  bignum.txt -e bye
>> redefined rdrop  redefined .r  redefined s>f  redefined f>s
>> 
>> real    0m6.122s
>> user    0m6.090s
>> sys     0m0.010s
>> ----

> Windows?

Raspbian (=Debian compiled for the Raspberry Pi).

-- 
Marcos Cruz
http://programandala.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42475

From"WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com>
Date2015-10-09 05:58 +0000
Message-ID<mv7l22$kbg$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#42453
lehs wrote:

> The speed of 64 bit GForth seems to be equal to the highly optimized SP-Forth, at least for BigInt.
> 
> b 26359783991551070871965201979080333254038743646746158379582192038055842791146833506745978666309678710238746262325665407448047112858614221184120023774728850927701745782077979943165434355776993447809155163506304287949484786229043007193369097865681445643720004387345872800008950502312482268122160708155160328564
> b 39327375191467048647521018841730348998598651522372708158670691892420060531890655533991461398550696324722351925617448324344083141484661951392820800479947685042791549748743564268081958080246132723174581232969062661990556972176861792341905425252382562697686127413259201904144867482279552760624394742040590855602
> b 16306675630939784626502807161425612212340131109932460322238576590610976549235432503764166590338557086651302692446204937053886057954003032814801648230668894753863150108029570966337696939560565101312815273803547555619029325583815565767168841836143511237512006023630352590540140638620838094344583215840893265550
> b**mod
> 
> takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.

Gauche Scheme (on a Win XP laptop):

(time (expt-mod 
26359783991551070871965201979080333254038743646746158379582192038055842791146833506745978666309678710238746262325665407448047112858614221184120023774728850927701745782077979943165434355776993447809155163506304287949484786229043007193369097865681445643720004387345872800008950502312482268122160708155160328564
39327375191467048647521018841730348998598651522372708158670691892420060531890655533991461398550696324722351925617448324344083141484661951392820800479947685042791549748743564268081958080246132723174581232969062661990556972176861792341905425252382562697686127413259201904144867482279552760624394742040590855602
16306675630939784626502807161425612212340131109932460322238576590610976549235432503764166590338557086651302692446204937053886057954003032814801648230668894753863150108029570966337696939560565101312815273803547555619029325583815565767168841836143511237512006023630352590540140638620838094344583215840893265550
))

; real   0.094
; user   0.094
; sys    0.000
13589152355661418800480923196880892958242540305591911682228289531245831992616543
54015304607565049742334138806783476234241745587301651007622341259308053962569610
43240764866117547156296134403689228799197376998122532074740059603789432043783522
66794545844684513362891786202126506784931492440650088987888029494246

Less than a tenth of a second.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42477

Fromlehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-08 23:08 -0700
Message-ID<038e2acd-97de-40a9-bdee-0371601a0eb2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42475
Yes, that's more what I'm aiming for!
The nice thing is that the code is very ordinary Forth and that 'garbage collection' is manually with bdrop etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#42482

Frommhx@iae.nl
Date2015-10-09 00:30 -0700
Message-ID<7548ac99-5e92-4081-b85f-17b76998bf96@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#42475
On Friday, October 9, 2015 at 8:00:32 AM UTC+2, WJ wrote:
> lehs wrote:
> 
> > The speed of 64 bit GForth seems to be equal to the highly optimized 
> > SP-Forth, at least for BigInt.
> > 
> > b 26359783991551070871965201979080333254038743646746158379582192038055842791146833506745978666309678710238746262325665407448047112858614221184120023774728850927701745782077979943165434355776993447809155163506304287949484786229043007193369097865681445643720004387345872800008950502312482268122160708155160328564
> > b 39327375191467048647521018841730348998598651522372708158670691892420060531890655533991461398550696324722351925617448324344083141484661951392820800479947685042791549748743564268081958080246132723174581232969062661990556972176861792341905425252382562697686127413259201904144867482279552760624394742040590855602
> > b 16306675630939784626502807161425612212340131109932460322238576590610976549235432503764166590338557086651302692446204937053886057954003032814801648230668894753863150108029570966337696939560565101312815273803547555619029325583815565767168841836143511237512006023630352590540140638620838094344583215840893265550
> > b**mod
> > 
> > takes a half second in both SP-Forth and GForth64 at Win 10.
> 
> Gauche Scheme (on a Win XP laptop):
> 
> (time (expt-mod 
> 26359783991551070871965201979080333254038743646746158379582192038055842791146833506745978666309678710238746262325665407448047112858614221184120023774728850927701745782077979943165434355776993447809155163506304287949484786229043007193369097865681445643720004387345872800008950502312482268122160708155160328564
> 39327375191467048647521018841730348998598651522372708158670691892420060531890655533991461398550696324722351925617448324344083141484661951392820800479947685042791549748743564268081958080246132723174581232969062661990556972176861792341905425252382562697686127413259201904144867482279552760624394742040590855602
> 16306675630939784626502807161425612212340131109932460322238576590610976549235432503764166590338557086651302692446204937053886057954003032814801648230668894753863150108029570966337696939560565101312815273803547555619029325583815565767168841836143511237512006023630352590540140638620838094344583215840893265550
> ))
> 
> ; real   0.094
> ; user   0.094
> ; sys    0.000
> 13589152355661418800480923196880892958242540305591911682228289531245831992616543
54015304607565049742334138806783476234241745587301651007622341259308053962569610
43240764866117547156296134403689228799197376998122532074740059603789432043783522
66794545844684513362891786202126506784931492440650088987888029494246
> 
> Less than a tenth of a second.

What's that in HEX ?

FORTH> TIMER-RESET vbase vexp vmod V^V  RR CR HEX .VNUM DECIMAL  CR .ELAPSED
135A,0226,6553,72F9,D981,97B2,166F,B297,E06F,4972,C9DA,5212,9C72,02A2,7F0F,9360,D80A,3CA3,9676,B7EF,5C20,6D92,93C5,6C4A,B5E8,E44E,F540,DBF9,ABBF,7DCB,F350,4173,1F3B,C2E5,E64A,30F6,EA9C,57BA,73E1,7212,F169,DC50,BD55,6523,92A7,9156,CF29,B0CE,AE1F,8BB4,B837,9E33,3D2B,2B9E,6CBE,A639,0007,67D9,EE29,8291,45EA,EE7A,0A37,6BE6

0.026 seconds elapsed. ok

( no libraries, high-level Forth only )

-marcel

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web