Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Parsing timestamps? Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 16:23:19 GMT Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien Lines: 22 Message-ID: <2025Jun24.182319@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> References: <1f433fabcb4d053d16cbc098dedc6c370608ac01@i2pn2.org> <2025Jun23.071834@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <4a4c38c99d22d97314ed5750af38430d@www.novabbs.com> <765bd244e1368b5691f18c748102470e8de1a30d@i2pn2.org> Injection-Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 18:35:48 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e03b5a449cc661d2b89ddea4041c5763"; logging-data="2230713"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/UetrClifuAFkl6m4xgU0I" Cancel-Lock: sha1:HoehQxYQpDfVFdf56YId/k7+m6Q= X-newsreader: xrn 10.11 Hans Bezemer writes: >I'm also puzzled why there is always so emphasis on the "speed" issue. I >mean - if you want speed, do your program in C -O3 so to say. It'll blow >any Forth out of the water. Take a look at the bubble benchmark in Figure 1 of . SwiftForth, VFX, and Gforth with all optimizations (the baseline) are faster than gcc-12 -O3. The reason for that is: |For bubble, gcc -O3 auto-vectorizes, and the result is that there is |partial overlap between a store and a following load, which results |in the hardware taking a slow path rather than performing one of its |store-to-load forwarding optimizations. - anton -- M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html New standard: https://forth-standard.org/ EuroForth 2023 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef23/papers/ EuroForth 2024 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef24/papers/