At 5:14 PM -0500 2/27/03, Damien Morton wrote:
"Dan Sugalski" <dan@sidhe.org>
At 1:54 PM -0500 2/27/03, Damien Morton wrote:
In general, it would seem that adding opcodes in bulk, even if many opcodes switch to the same labels, results in a minor performance loss.
While I'm somewhat loathe to help you guys go faster (that whole pie thing) you might want to take a look at commonly used pairs of opcodes and reordering the code in the switch body so pairs are adjacent and more likely to be in cache.
I caught the whole pie conversation, but I missed how you were going to test Parrot against Python.
How exactly will this competion be measured?
We've still got to hash out the details, but in december someone'll generate a bytecode file for the program(s) we're going to be running. We both get to run converters/optimizers over them if we choose. Then at the 2004 OSCON we'll run the converted programs and whichever takes less time (we've not set whether it's wall or CPU time, though I'm tempted to go for CPU so neither gets penalized for the odd background task that might be running) wins. The official details, limits, and pie flavors will likely be set at this summer's OSCON. -- Dan --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai dan@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk