Re: RTX2000 optimization

From	"Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: RTX2000 optimization
Date	2012-10-24 08:47 -0400
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<k68npd$9f7$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<e1479cfa-a969-40ab-b20c-096d82601657@googlegroups.com> <k64svk$njr$1@speranza.aioe.org> <k672lj$82o$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:k672lj$82o$1@dont-email.me...
> On 10/22/2012 9:51 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> > "Brad Eckert"<hwfwguy@gmail.com>  wrote in message
> > news:e1479cfa-a969-40ab-b20c-096d82601657@googlegroups.com...
> >> I've been thinking about Novix style processors like the RTX2000.
> >> There are many Forth sequences that can be compacted into one
> >> instruction, so with a good optimizer the chip can execute several
> >> Forth (source) primitives in one machine cycle. I suspect though
> >> that such optimization opportunities are the exception rather than the
> >> rule.
> >>
> >
> > The question for both you (and Rick) is if you create new, faster, more
> > powerful, multiple operation instructions, how do you ensure they are
> > used?  Without an optimizer, it's likely the instruction will have a low
> > instruction frequency.  I.e., a person is unlikely to use it.  In which
> > case, there is no point in using or implementing it.
> > (This is repeated later in a reply to Rick.)
>
> We aren't talking about Forth coding really.  We are talking about the
> assembly language for a machine.  I don't think instructions will go
> unused just because they are mapped to Forth in a more complicated way
> than 1 to 1 (or 1/2 to 1).
>
> >> Does anyone here have a feel for the correspondence between Forth
> >> source primitives and generated code?
> >
> > Generally, Forth's built using "primitives" or low-level words generally
> > need 30 to 40 or so.  I kept track of how many are needed for certain
> > Forths.  There are a few posts by me to c.l.f. with counts and specific
> > words used.
>
> Don't confuse Forth low level primitives (which are really HLL
> primitives selected to be convenient for the programmer writing a Forth)
> and assembly language which has to be selected in part based on what is
> practical and efficient to implement.  Chuck's machine only uses 32
> opcodes and you can get by with as few as 16.
>

For temporary reasons, most of my Forth stack operators, like DUP SWAP etc,
aren't currently low-level Forth "primitives".  They're implemented in
high-level Forth using an even lower set of actual stack "primitives", which
I'll call sub-operators for this thread.  These sub-operators could be
considered to be "stack assembly instructions" for my Forth.  Currently,
only >R and R> are actually "primitives" coded in C.  Eventually, DUP DROP
SWAP OVER will be actual low-level Forth "primitives", as they once were.

So, a word like OVER can be coded in many ways.  I have 22 different
definitions just for OVER in a list, and one can construct many more.  E.g.,

 : OVER >R DUP R> SWAP ;
 : OVER 1 PICK ;
 : OVER SWAP TUCK ;
 : OVER SWAP DUP -ROT ;
 : OVER NUP SWAP ;
etc.

Which definition you choose affects how fast OVER executes and depends on
what operations you have available and on how fast each of those operations
are.

E.g., if >R >R DUP SWAP and -ROT are all very fast machine instructions for
your processor, then ">R DUP R> SWAP" and "SWAP DUP -ROT" should be fast
sequences.  And, one sequence will be faster than the other, depending on
how fast each instruction is.  But, if -ROT is not a machine instruction,
e.g., perhaps coded as "ROT ROT" or "SWAP >R SWAP R>", or -ROT is a very
slow machine instruction, then "SWAP DUP -ROT" is more expensive than ">R
DUP R> SWAP".

The instructions also need to be balanced acrossed many Forth words.
Originally, I had the 2xxx series words defined in terms of the simpler
stack operators, like SWAP DUP etc.  When I converted to sub-operators, the
number of operations per definition dropped dramatically for some of the
2xxx definitions.  Since the sub-operators are primitives, some of the 2xxx
definitions became faster.  However, after converting all of the simpler
stack operators to sub-operators, a few of the non-primitive simple stack
operators ended up with more operations per definition.  So some words
became much faster, while others became slightly slower.  And, the former
primitives became real slow, but they'll be converted back eventually.

Let's take a look at 2OVER for my Forth interpreter.  I could easily
implement it as a Forth low-level "primitive".  Or, I could define it in
high-level Forth. Or, I could define it in high-level Forth in terms of
sub-operators which are actually the low-level "primitives".

In high-level Forth, 2OVER can be defined:

 : 2OVER 2>R 2DUP 2R> 2SWAP ;

In terms of my sub-operators, my 2OVER definition has ten words it's
definition.  Clearly, that's many more words than the four in definition
above.  But, 2>R 2R> 2DUP and 2SWAP are also implemented in high-level
Forth using the same set of sub-operators.  So, 2>R 2R> 2DUP and 2SWAP
aren't "primitives" nor are they a single sub-operator each.

The 2>R sequence has six items.
The 2DUP sequence has six items.
The 2R> sequence has six items.
The 2SWAP sequence has eight items.

The 2OVER sequence has ten items.

So, 2OVER is only 10 items using a single sequence of sub-operators instead
of a total 28 items using four sequences of sub-operators for the four words
in the high-level definition.  If the 2>R 2DUP 2R> and 2SWAP words are
defined in terms of standard Forth words:

The 2>R sequence has three items.
The 2DUP sequence has ten items over multiple words.
The 2R> sequence has three items.
The 2SWAP sequence has twelve items over multiple words.

In this case, the counts changed, but it just happens that it's total is 28
also...  Usually, it's more.  Of course, you'd rather have a 2DUP of six
items instead of ten, i.e., balance.  If the instructions are unbalanced,
then heavy use of a single Forth word will slow the code speed way down.
I.e., many 2DUP's of ten items is much worse than many 2DUP's with six
items, even if other used words are made slightly slower, like 2>R and 2R>.
Of course, you don't know if your user's code will follow the measured
instruction frequencies or not.  But, at this point, you're the only user
...

As a primitive, 2OVER will be a small C routine which is compiled to
optimized, machine code.

Rod Pemberton

Thread

RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 08:53 -0700
  Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-22 11:21 -0500
  Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 09:56 -0700
    Re: RTX2000 optimization Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 12:10 -0700
      Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 12:55 -0700
      Re: RTX2000 optimization Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-22 22:02 +0200
      Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 16:50 -0400
        Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-22 21:52 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-22 22:03 -0700
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-23 03:19 -0500
              Re: RTX2000 optimization vandys@vsta.org - 2012-10-23 17:54 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-24 08:16 -0700
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:19 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-24 06:56 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-24 12:26 +0000
              Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 15:25 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:30 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 22:10 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 16:43 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 17:55 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:44 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-27 02:17 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 23:01 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-27 22:18 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 19:19 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-28 04:21 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 14:36 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-29 19:06 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-30 02:07 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-30 09:36 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-30 08:09 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-30 19:14 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-30 18:50 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 07:37 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-31 15:27 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 08:59 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-31 11:18 -0500
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 13:49 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 13:43 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 12:03 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 09:05 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 09:06 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 09:25 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] danw8804@gmail.com - 2012-10-31 09:38 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:30 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:27 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 12:01 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 16:31 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 20:33 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 14:05 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-01 11:23 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 14:31 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 22:11 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 12:50 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 10:42 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 13:59 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 12:10 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 15:42 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 15:56 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 20:53 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-11-04 11:10 +0000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-04 22:58 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-05 15:29 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-05 14:40 +0000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 11:36 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-05 09:02 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 15:22 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-05 12:56 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 12:22 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-06 09:29 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 12:53 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-06 10:00 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-06 08:04 -1000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 13:37 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-05 21:06 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 15:29 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-06 16:28 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 12:50 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-07 20:29 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-04 10:40 +0000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-01 21:26 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-01 13:44 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-02 04:03 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2012-11-04 17:17 -0600
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 12:48 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-02 10:25 -1000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 19:54 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-03 17:47 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 14:05 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-05 11:55 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 19:20 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-11-04 16:08 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-11-04 17:14 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-04 18:40 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-04 09:36 -0600
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2012-11-04 23:49 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 12:11 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 20:08 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 10:59 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 12:12 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 12:14 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 10:51 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 11:28 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 14:58 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 14:45 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 15:04 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 21:09 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 16:59 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-28 07:59 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 15:06 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 16:35 -0400
        Re: RTX2000 optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-23 12:44 +0000
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:32 -0400
  Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 13:54 -0700
    Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 14:14 -0700
      Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 14:26 -0700
        Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 16:00 -0700
  Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-22 21:51 -0400
    Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:36 -0400
      Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-24 08:47 -0400
        Re: RTX2000 optimization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-24 06:36 -0700
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 15:33 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-25 04:54 -0700
              Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 17:35 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 15:27 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 19:10 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 18:34 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:03 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-26 19:56 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 18:34 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 22:27 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:27 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:17 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-26 19:44 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:59 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:42 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:55 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-25 04:49 -0700
          addressable stack, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-05 14:04 -0500
        Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 15:44 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:50 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 18:58 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 16:07 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 19:20 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-26 20:57 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 15:43 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-28 05:01 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 15:23 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-29 19:32 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-30 19:00 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 01:23 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:56 -0400
  Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 19:44 -0700
    Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:47 -0400
      Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-23 16:00 -0700
        Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 21:07 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-23 18:44 -0700
            Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 16:03 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 13:15 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 16:25 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 03:15 +0200
      Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 09:55 -0700
        Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 10:04 -0700
          Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 12:00 -0700
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 23:24 -0700
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 09:26 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 10:39 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 19:35 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 18:26 +0200
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 16:10 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 13:21 -0700
  Re: RTX2000 optimization stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-23 10:52 +0000

csiph-web