Re: Why are intepreters so slow today
Chris Winemiller (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 19 Apr 1994 18:54:57 GMT
In article <1994Apr19.email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Jeff Cantwell) writes:
>In article <1994Apr16.email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (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 Winemiller Internet: email@example.com
Texas Instruments firstname.lastname@example.org
PO Box 655012 M/S 3635
Dallas, TX 75265 Voice: (214) 917-0332