Hi Przemek,
Could you please help us review and consider synch issues of DATETIME
support between Harboiur and xHarbour?
Best regards and TIA,
Ron
--
From: "PrzemyslawCzerpak"
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 4:26 PM
To: "Patrick Mast, xHarbour
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Patrick Mast, xHarbour.com Inc. wrote:
Hi,
> > One has been already mentioned: bigger EXE size (but it would be a minor
> > problem to exchange for faster execution).
> I agree. Faster is more important than small EXE's. We have so big
> HD's these days!
In most of cases it'
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Enrico Maria Giordano wrote:
Hi,
> I understand your point of view but the final test is: recompile your
> application, give it to your client and wait for a call from your client
> saying "Hey! The application is sensibly faster now!". :-)
Without any doubts it's the best
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Przemyslaw Czerpak"
A: "Enrico Maria Giordano" ;
"Xharbour-Developers List"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 22.14
Oggetto: [xHarbour-developers] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: ChangeLog:
2011-11-10 13:10 UTC+0700 AndiJahja
I understand your point of
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Enrico Maria Giordano wrote:
Hi,
> > Anyhow maybe you will find this real life code as more interesting.
> > Long time ago one of my friends asked me about help in one mathematical
> > problem. He had to resolve this equation:
> > TOTEK
> >+TO
> >+ TWOJA
> >
Hey Enrico,
> One has been already mentioned: bigger EXE size (but it would be a minor
> problem to exchange for faster execution).
I agree. Faster is more important than small EXE's. We have so big
HD's these days!
Patrick
---
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Patrick Mast, xHarbour."
A: "Przemysław Czerpak"
Cc: "Enrico Maria Giordano" ;
"Xharbour-Developers List"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 21.17
Oggetto: Re: [xHarbour-developers] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: ChangeLog:
2011-11-10 13:10 UTC+0700 AndiJahja
>
Hello,
So, why are we not using -gc3 all the time? What are the downsides of
using -gc3?
Thanks!
Patrick
2011/11/10 Przemysław Czerpak :
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Enrico Maria Giordano wrote:
>> > > This is not a real world test, sorry.
>> > Can you exaplain why?
>> You don't need of my explanatio
2011-11-11 02:35 UTC+0700 Andi Jahja
* ChangeLog
! minor correction on my previous log of: 2011-11-10 21:53 UTC+0700
* source/vm/hvm.c
! bug fix on substraction of DATETIME value
Andi
--
RSA(R) Conference
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Przemysław Czerpak"
A: "Enrico Maria Giordano" ;
"Xharbour-Developers List"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 17.43
Oggetto: [xHarbour-developers] [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: ChangeLog: 2011-11-10
13:10 UTC+0700 AndiJahja
> Anyhow maybe you will find this real
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Enrico Maria Giordano wrote:
> > > This is not a real world test, sorry.
> > Can you exaplain why?
> You don't need of my explanation. You know much better than me of what I'm
> talking about.
For me it's perfect test which shows the performance of different
HVM operations so
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:06:29 +0100
"Patrick Mast, xHarbour." wrote:
> Great! Thanks Andi! ;-))
One thing left, hb_vmMinus() is to be modified for DATETIME value.
I'll do it tomorrow.
Andi
--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Sav
Great! Thanks Andi! ;-))
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Andi Jahja wrote:
> Hello,
>
> By my latest commit, this ugly bug is fixed :)
> So the attached message is no loner valid. We can freely use:
>
> LOCAL dT := { ^ 2011/11/09 12:30:00 }
>
> With whatever -gcn switch.
>
> Andi
>
> On Thu, 10
Hello,
By my latest commit, this ugly bug is fixed :)
So the attached message is no loner valid. We can freely use:
LOCAL dT := { ^ 2011/11/09 12:30:00 }
With whatever -gcn switch.
Andi
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 20:40:03 +0700
Andi Jahja wrote:
> Hello,
>
> IMO, this requires modification in th
2011-11-10 21:53 UTC+0700 Andi Jahja
* include/hbxvm.h
! bug fix on definition og hb_vmPushDateTime()
Andi
--
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Save $700 by Nov 18
Register now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1
___
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Przemyslaw Czerpak"
A: "Xharbour-Developers List"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 15.18
Oggetto: [xHarbour-developers] [SPAM] Re: ChangeLog: 2011-11-10 13:10
UTC+0700 AndiJahja
> > This is not a real world test, sorry.
>
> Can you exaplain why?
You d
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Enrico Maria Giordano wrote:
> > For a rough test, you can build tests/speedtst.prg with -gc0 and -gc3
> > and use the default library.
> > I am sure you will gain a speed improvement in the order of more than
> > 10%.
> This is not a real world test, sorry.
Can you exaplain w
Hello,
IMO, this requires modification in the compiler source, among others
addition of another PCODE and related function to generate it.
This is out of my scope for this moment, sorry.
So, anyone who uses -gc3, please use the following code:
LOCAL dT := DATETIME( 2011, 11, 09, 12, 30, 00
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Andi Jahja"
A: "Enrico Maria Giordano"
Cc: "xharbour developer list"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 12.21
Oggetto: Re: [xHarbour-developers] ChangeLog: 2011-11-10 13:10 UTC+0700
AndiJahja
> > Thank you. Anybody already made real world tests with -gc
Hi Enrico,
> Thank you. Anybody already made real world tests with -gc3?
For a rough test, you can build tests/speedtst.prg with -gc0 and -gc3
and use the default library.
I am sure you will gain a speed improvement in the order of more than
10%.
Andi
-
Hello,
> Programatically, there are advantages for speed at the expense of bigger
> file size. By compiling a PRG with -gc3, xHarbour virtual machine ( to
> be exact: function hb_vmExecute() ) will be bypassed. IOW, PCODEs are no
> longer analyzed via a switch-case construct. Under -gc3, PCODEs ar
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Andi Jahja"
A: "Enrico Maria Giordano" ; "xharbour
developer list"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 11.08
Oggetto: Re: [xHarbour-developers] ChangeLog: 2011-11-10 13:10 UTC+0700
AndiJahja
> > Are there real advantages in compiling with -gc3 (speed, si
Hello,
> > Programatically, there are advantages for speed at the expense of bigger
> > file size. By compiling a PRG with -gc3, xHarbour virtual machine ( to
> > be exact: function hb_vmExecute() ) will be bypassed. IOW, PCODEs are no
> > longer analyzed via a switch-case construct. Under -gc3, P
Hi Enrico,
> Are there real advantages in compiling with -gc3 (speed, size, ...)?
A short explanation:
Programatically, there are advantages for speed at the expense of bigger
file size. By compiling a PRG with -gc3, xHarbour virtual machine ( to
be exact: function hb_vmExecute() ) will be bypas
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Andi Jahja"
A: "xharbour developer list"
Data invio: giovedì 10 novembre 2011 7.12
Oggetto: [xHarbour-developers] ChangeLog: 2011-11-10 13:10 UTC+0700
AndiJahja
> 2011-11-10 13:10 UTC+0700 Andi Jahja
> * source/compiler/gencc.c
>+ function HB_GENC_FU
25 matches
Mail list logo
