Thread: 68k details
View Single Post
Old 29 October 2018, 11:04   #589
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 47
Posts: 3,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
Sorry but you have used unfair tricks again.
That's the pot calling the kettle black...
Who uses tricks ? Code for time measurement is larger on the Amiga !
So we both can just remove it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
My spigot implementation claims that it is the fastest but to prove this it requires a timer result. You have cut it! So you code have proved nothing.
Who started cutting ?
Sorry, but your 80386 code appears to have non-working timer code. Where is the text for the message saying what time it took ?
Furthermore, i never said this version was the fastest anymore. I never said it still measured time anymore. No OS calls, we said. I'm just approaching this goal.


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
The 80386 is still unbeaten.
I wouldn't say that, no. It's unbeaten only because you constantly change the rules.
However, even with whatever rules you use, it would be largely beaten if using my own "reencoded from 68k" instruction set


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
With the help of ARM experts I have just improved my codes for the ARM's line drawing routine.
Showing ARM code here is a very good idea. Now we're talking on something concrete (even thouth it's still just a single, small example).


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
It is only 88 bytes now! The 80386's routine takes 84. ARM code uses only one jump but 80386 and 68000 codes - 7.
Best is still 72 bytes, and i didn't make that much efforts to reduce it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
So ARM has quite good code density when it is programmed properly.
Please do not draw generalities from a single example.


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
It is also notable that one assembly line almost always corresponds one line in the C-source code. What a beauty!
There is no beauty for me in C code, and therefore no beauty to whatever corresponds to it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
BTW I have tested this code with my Raspberry Pi so it is 100% correct.
Seems we just have to trust you on this, hmm ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
I have checked the 386 code and without timer support it can be less than 180 bytes. BTW I have published the code for 80286 by a mistake, the fair code for 386 is less than 386 bytes.
This means timer support would be more than half the code, quite irrealistic.
And that's a claim without proof. You're quite fast saying that for others, but you do the same now :/


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
English is very tough. IMHO nobody knows it perfectly even the native speakers!
For me English is too simple, imprecise language. In short, not the right tool - but what else can we do.


Quote:
Originally Posted by litwr View Post
With help I have made other improvements to ARM code - it is only 80 bytes now - it is less than the code for 80386 and close to size size of 68000 codes (72 bytes)!
Come on, more efforts on the "true" 80-byte version (2 insns to remove) and it could equal the 68k version
Could you please post the 80386 code here as well ?
meynaf is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04674 seconds with 11 queries