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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #54627

Re: CASEs compared

From rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Subject Re: CASEs compared
Date 2017-02-04 11:07 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <o74u57$68a$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <o6v0nr$1id1$1@gioia.aioe.org> <o70kdn$j50$1@dont-email.me> <o73bhd$h72$1@gioia.aioe.org> <o73ldb$ava$1@dont-email.me> <o74f31$1sao$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2/4/2017 6:50 AM, HAA wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>> ...
>> Without wading through the assembly code, I can't see how the simple
>> changes you made would cause such large changes in the assembly code.
>> The part that recurs three times is one Forth word shorter.  The two
>> parts that are used once are one Forth word longer.  Any ideas?
>>
>> Looks to me that VFX is doing some great optimizations for TEST1 while
>> doing virtually nothing for TEST2.  What this is showing is not the
>> difference in the two examples, but the difference in how VFX treats them.
>
> You would have to ask MPE but my guess is once you spill to the return stack
> there's less interest to optimize as the return stack is supposed to be for
> temporary storage.

"Less interest"???  Optimization is optimization.  Look at the assembly 
generated.  It is horribly suboptimal with moves from the stack cache 
register to the data stack, then move from the return stack to register, 
registers getting clobbered and reloaded a few instructions later.  This 
isn't code looking for optimization, this is just poor code generation.


>> I would try these cases under Win32Forth but I can't seem to figure out
>> how to disassemble a forth definition.
>
> Win32F is non-optimized threaded code.  SEE xxx is as good as you will get.
> LOCATE xxx can be used to show the source code of individual words.
>
>
>


-- 

Rick C

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-30 22:34 +1100
  Re: CASEs compared anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-30 15:56 +0000
    Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-30 09:57 -0800
      Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-31 14:26 +1100
        Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 08:12 -0800
          Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-01 11:39 +1100
            Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 22:37 -0800
              Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-01 12:26 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-01 16:50 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-01 18:02 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-02 21:12 +1100
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 13:46 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 17:01 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-04 12:43 +1100
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 17:52 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-02-04 11:10 +0000
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 19:57 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 17:05 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 21:55 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 02:11 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 10:52 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 17:38 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 22:08 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 21:40 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 01:16 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 14:40 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 17:47 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 22:04 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-04 12:39 +1100
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 23:32 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-04 22:50 +1100
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 11:07 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 08:48 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:01 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 16:43 -0500
                Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 18:53 -0800
                Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-05 19:12 +1100
    Re: CASEs compared "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-31 14:25 +1100
  Re: CASEs compared Elliott Chapin <elliott.chapin@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 08:25 -0800
    Re: CASEs compared Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 00:42 +0100
  Re: CASEs compared jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 17:46 -0800
    Re: CASEs compared hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-17 09:09 -0800

csiph-web