, June 16, 2018 12:23 AM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu
Subject: Re: Count Words?
As with any multiple-byte operand with no alignment requirements, the second
operand of TRT (containing the function bytes) can span a cache line or page
boundary. So, unless the programmer is exceedingly
On 17 June 2018 at 03:57, Farley, Peter x23353
wrote:
> Didn't think of that, but you are probably right - pipeline stalls are
> quite expensive and tough to benchmark.
>
But pipeline stalls at least are consistent and show in a profile, even
though it may not show the exact spot.
I find
From: "Charles Mills"
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2018 11:27 PM
Is it worth pointing out that English is not an alphabet?
The context was English alphabet.
That English changes all the time?
The alphabet doesn't.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
From: "Walt Farrell"
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2018 11:25 PM
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 13:17:52 +1000, Robin Vowels wrote:
From: "Charles Mills"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 10:43 PM
Possible non-alphabetic characters number around 200
FSVO "alphabet"
For all values of alphabet. English
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
EXTERNAL EMAIL
On 2018-06-16, at 18:53:32, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
>
> The PoP says for the Vector String instructions that "For all instructions
> that optionally set the condition code, performance may be degraded if th
case?
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2018 9:23 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
On 6/16/2018 5:53 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> The
On 2018-06-16, at 18:53:32, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
>
> The PoP says for the Vector String instructions that "For all instructions
> that optionally set the condition code, performance may be degraded if the
> condition code is set."
>
I suspect it's not that the Vector String instruction
On 6/16/2018 5:53 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
The PoP says for the Vector String instructions that "For all instructions that
optionally set the condition code, performance may be degraded if the condition code is
set."
Have you found that performance can be significantly (or at all)
18 4:24 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
EXTERNAL EMAIL
On 6/16/2018 12:15 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
> I stand corrected. Thanks.
>
> This architecture has grown beyond human ken. Let the compiler do it, and
> hope the compiler author gets it right.
On 6/16/2018 12:15 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I stand corrected. Thanks.
This architecture has grown beyond human ken. Let the compiler do it, and
hope the compiler author gets it right.
It's still understandable and VERY usable in hand-written code for real
HLASM programmers.
It just
On 2018-06-16, at 12:06:48, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
> And I got that instruction specification wrong. VFAEB is the extended
> mnemonic form for VFAE with M4 set to 0 for byte length, so the "inverted"
> instruction would be VFAEB V1,V1,V0,9 (adding 8 for mask bit zero to the M5
> operand
mbler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 9:19 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
On 2018-06-14, at 18:50:01, Robin Vowels wrote:
On 2018-06-14, at 16:05:54, Ed Jaffe wrote:
>
> Use VL to load 16 one-byte
: Friday, June 15, 2018 8:18 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
From: "Charles Mills"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 10:43 PM
>> Possible non-alphabetic characters number around 200
>
> FSVO "alphabet"
For all values of alphabet. English
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 13:17:52 +1000, Robin Vowels wrote:
>From: "Charles Mills"
>Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 10:43 PM
>
>
>>> Possible non-alphabetic characters number around 200
>>
>> FSVO "alphabet"
>
>For all values of alphabet. English hasn't changed much lately,
>as I said.
Did the OP
As with any multiple-byte operand with no alignment requirements, the second
operand of TRT (containing the function bytes) can span a cache line or page
boundary. So, unless the programmer is exceedingly confident of the content of
the first operand of TRT (i.e., the stuff that's being
From: "Charles Mills"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 10:43 PM
Possible non-alphabetic characters number around 200
FSVO "alphabet"
For all values of alphabet. English hasn't changed much lately,
as I said.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
From: "Tony Harminc"
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2018 3:03 AM
On 14 June 2018 at 15:40, Charles Mills wrote:
Not the answer to your question but I don't think "TRT performs badly."
It is just that people sometimes assume that because it is a single
instruction in the Pop it must execute
Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Paul Gilmartin <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 12:53 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu
Subject: Re: Count Words?
On 2018-06-15, at 10:49:05, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> What about translation and scanning
On 14 June 2018 at 15:40, Charles Mills wrote:
> Not the answer to your question but I don't think "TRT performs badly."
>
> It is just that people sometimes assume that because it is a single
> instruction in the Pop it must execute roughly as fast as many simple
> instructions.
>
> I think it
Subject: Re: Count Words?
Back around the z9 (circa 2005), IBM pushed the TRT instruction into the
hardware coprocessor (aka CoP). This produced fabulous performance scanning
the first operand if the nonzero function byte occurred deep into the first
operand (e.g., hundreds of bytes deep
Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of glen herrmannsfeldt
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 11:33 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu
Subject: Re: Count Words?
Nothing against discussions on how to write fast code, but I don’t believe that
this is normally necessary.
About 20 years ago, I was counting
U
Subject: Re: Count Words?
From: "Paul Gilmartin" <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:18 AM
> Is there a modern, clever, efficient way to count words in a string where:
> o A separator is or (+ others ad lib.)
> o
From: "Ed Jaffe"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 11:14 AM
On 6/14/2018 5:44 PM, Robin Vowels wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Jaffe"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:34 AM
BY FAR the fastest way HANDS DOWN -- if you're looking for 16 or
fewer characters -- is with the vector
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Gilmartin" <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
To:
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 11:18 AM
On 2018-06-14, at 18:50:01, Robin Vowels wrote:
Why is everyone afraid to use TRT?
It is designed for just such a task.
- Original Message
How is ths useful? What does it mean?
- Original Message -
From: "Keven"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 12:32 PM
I think the technical answer in this context is:1 x 16-letter word2 x 8-letter words 4 x 4-letter
words8 x 2-letter words16 x 1-letter words
This assumes single-byte
GH's contribution seems to be not particularly relevant.
However, I may add that in PL/I one trivial statement will count
the number of words when any particular character (such as blank)
is the delimiter.
To permit bunches of other characters to be delimiters, a prior call to the
TRANSLATE
From: "Paul Gilmartin" <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:18 AM
Is there a modern, clever, efficient way to count words in a string where:
o A separator is or (+ others ad lib.)
o A word is a maximal non-empty sequence of consecuti
Amen!
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of glen herrmannsfeldt
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 8:34 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
Nothing against discussions on how to write
On 2018-06-14, at 21:21:11, Dan Greiner wrote:
> Back around the z9 (circa 2005), IBM pushed the TRT instruction into the
> hardware coprocessor (aka CoP). This produced fabulous performance scanning
> the first operand if the nonzero function byte occurred deep into the first
> operand
Nothing against discussions on how to write fast code, but I don’t believe that
this is normally necessary.
About 20 years ago, I was counting words, not just how many, but how many of
each word, on gigabytes of text.
(Full text US patents for two years.) I did it in Java (with JIT compiler
Back around the z9 (circa 2005), IBM pushed the TRT instruction into the
hardware coprocessor (aka CoP). This produced fabulous performance scanning
the first operand if the nonzero function byte occurred deep into the first
operand (e.g., hundreds of bytes deep). Unfortunately, empirical
I think the technical answer in this context is:1 x 16-letter
word2 x 8-letter words 4 x 4-letter words8 x 2-letter words16 x 1-letter
words
This assumes single-byte character encoding.
Sorry if this sounds facile; I found
On 6/14/2018 6:18 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Oops! From PoOps:
Proceeding from left to right, the elements of the second operand are
compared with the corresponding elements of the third operand and
optionally with zero.
"Corresponding element" is the problem.
If the second
On 2018-06-14, at 18:50:01, Robin Vowels wrote:
> Why is everyone afraid to use TRT?
> It is designed for just such a task.
>
> - Original Message - From: "Charles Mills"
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:40 AM
>
>> Not the answer to your question but I don't think "TRT performs badly."
On 6/14/2018 5:44 PM, Robin Vowels wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Ed Jaffe"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:34 AM
BY FAR the fastest way HANDS DOWN -- if you're looking for 16 or
fewer characters -- is with the vector instructions...
How many words can you fit into 16 characters?
for the job [such as TRT]
makes it easier to write and debug.
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Mills"
To:
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:40 AM
Subject: Re: Count Words?
Not the answer to your question but I don't think "TRT performs badly."
It is just that peo
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Jaffe"
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 5:34 AM
BY FAR the fastest way HANDS DOWN -- if you're looking for 16 or fewer
characters -- is with the vector instructions...
How many words can you fit into 16 characters?
---
This email has been checked for
Thank you!
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Ed Jaffe
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 6:06 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
On 6/14/2018 1:50 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote
On 6/14/2018 3:05 PM, Ed Jaffe wrote:
LA R1,0(R15,1R1)
Of course, I intended to type LA R1,0(R15,R1)
--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/
On 6/14/2018 1:50 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote:
Any way you could share a code example? Or at least pseudo code for the
technique?
Use VL to load 16 one-byte search arguments into (for example) V0
Use VLL to load 16 bytes (or how ever many remain if <16) of the string
into (for example)
Subject: Re: Count Words?
BY FAR the fastest way HANDS DOWN -- if you're looking for 16 or fewer
characters -- is with the vector instructions...
On 6/14/2018 12:18 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> Is there a modern, clever, efficient way to count words in a string where:
> o A separator is or (+
.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 4:17 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
One could reverse engineer the XLC/C++ library module
: Thursday, June 14, 2018 3:41 PM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Count Words?
Not the answer to your question but I don't think "TRT performs badly."
It is just that people sometimes assume that because it is a single
instruction in the Pop it must execute roughly as fast as m
RT in assembler" --
implementing it as a subroutine as if the opcode magically vanished.
Now picture a version of that only somewhat faster because millicode has
some special tricks up its sleeve -- that's TRT.
If I had to count words in a string in assembler I would probably just
BY FAR the fastest way HANDS DOWN -- if you're looking for 16 or fewer
characters -- is with the vector instructions...
On 6/14/2018 12:18 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Is there a modern, clever, efficient way to count words in a string where:
o A separator is or (+ others ad lib.)
o A word
Is there a modern, clever, efficient way to count words in a string where:
o A separator is or (+ others ad lib.)
o A word is a maximal non-empty sequence of consecutive non-separator
characters.
(Whew!)
Do TRT and CLI remain the best primitives? (TRT is reported to
perform badly, perhaps
46 matches
Mail list logo
