User Tools

Site Tools


assemblyscript_in_c

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
assemblyscript_in_c [2026/01/21 01:58] appledogassemblyscript_in_c [2026/01/21 01:59] (current) appledog
Line 34: Line 34:
 Pre-C NOP was 114 MIPS. Post-C... wait for it... 105 MIPS. Not bad! Then I looked at the leader function. Ther's an IF in the hot path now. It also damages every other instruction! So for example, if I look at LDA now it's no longer a 98 MIPS operation -- it's 85. This strongly implies that the IF is also damaging POST-C's operational speed by some number. Likely 10-15 just like in AssemblyScript. The question is then, can POST-C LDA or ADD or any other compete with it's Pre-C version? And, is it worth it to convert //everything// into C? Pre-C NOP was 114 MIPS. Post-C... wait for it... 105 MIPS. Not bad! Then I looked at the leader function. Ther's an IF in the hot path now. It also damages every other instruction! So for example, if I look at LDA now it's no longer a 98 MIPS operation -- it's 85. This strongly implies that the IF is also damaging POST-C's operational speed by some number. Likely 10-15 just like in AssemblyScript. The question is then, can POST-C LDA or ADD or any other compete with it's Pre-C version? And, is it worth it to convert //everything// into C?
  
-First, the ISA has to be solid. Feature freeze. Then we move everything into C. The more we move, hopefully, the faster it gets. This is on the back burner for now, while we work on [[PATB]].+First, the ISA has to be solid. Feature freeze. Then we move everything into C. The more we move, hopefully, the faster it gets. This is on the back burner for now, while we work on Pao Alto Tiny Basic (see INT 05h documentation).
  
 == Observations == Observations
assemblyscript_in_c.1768960702.txt.gz · Last modified: by appledog

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki