At 03:02 AM 11/11/2001 -0500, James Mastros wrote:
>On Sat, 10 Nov 2001, Leon Brocard wrote:
> > mops.pasm uses a very simple loop to figure out how many operations a
> > second parrot can go. However, the loop it uses is inefficient: it
> > does a "branch" *and* an "eq" every time around.
>
> > mops.pasm: 11.713909
> > ./mops: 108.442655
> >
> > mops.pasm: 10.647256
> > ./mops: 73.574232
> >
> > Of course, the benchmark could be improved, but I suggest we should at
> > least change it to be good, tight code ;-)
>Perhaps it's just too late at night, but if this cange makes it better,
>tighter code, shouldn't it make the MOPS numbers look better, not worse?
Does someone want to maybe cook up a more reasonable benchmark? MOPS is
just a quick toss-off program, after all.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
