Re: Why are intepreters so slow today
Chris Winemiller (clw@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com)
Tue, 19 Apr 1994 18:54:57 GMT
In article <1994Apr19.151539.3325@news.vanderbilt.edu> cantwell@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Jeff Cantwell) writes:
>In article <1994Apr16.050603.4921@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com> clw@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com (Chris Winemiller) writes:
>
>>I tried this on my machine, and also tried the equivalent code in
>>Smalltalk/V for Win32:
>>
>>x := 0.0.
>>1000000 timesRepeat: [x := x + 1.0]
>>
>>The C version, running in a DOS window under Windows 3.1, executed in
>>about 4 seconds. The Smalltalk code ran in 14 seconds. That's a factor
>>of between 1/3 and 1/4 the speed of the C version---Certainly within
>>your criterion of 1/10.
>
>Just out of curiosity, what machine do you have? I ran this on my 66
>Mhz 486 and it ran in 4 seconds using PP VW 1.0b.
486 DX, 33MHz, 16M memory, Smalltalk/V for Win32 2.0.2. Also, I always
have a DOS box active (contains Waffle, for receiving email and news);
this slows down the performance of other apps on the machine.
Chris
--
Chris Winemiller Internet: cwinemil@lobby.ti.com
Texas Instruments clw@works.ti.com
PO Box 655012 M/S 3635
Dallas, TX 75265 Voice: (214) 917-0332