Image Map Image Map
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 289101112
Results 111 to 116 of 116

Thread: Status of Pascal

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Freedom City
    Posts
    6,162
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    I would've only had time to do that during compilation...

    I distinctly recall not using the mouse in the IDE. I also seem to remember that many keystrokes from TP4 were changed by TP6 which irritated me. I'm not sure what they were, probably Wordstar style block commands or something.

  2. #112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trixter View Post
    If you have a measured example of that behavior, send me a PM, maybe I can figure out what's going on in your code.
    I will look for an example.
    With kind regards / met vriendelijke groet, Ruud Baltissen

    www.baltissen.org

  3. #113

    Default

    Hallo Trixter,

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruud View Post
    I will look for an example.
    I'm sorry but I think those programs were my assemblers and disassemblers and these have moved FreePascal quite some time ago (10 years?). I clearly understand your arguments but in those days it was a fact. But adding more and more functions and supporting more CPUs the tools didn't only get more memory hungry but I ran against this 64 KB barrier again and again. So at the end I had to switch to FreePascal. But doing so I got another idea: it were multi-pass assemblers. So why not reading the source code into memory the first time and start the disassembly from there? That worked out fine. And two things: FPC improved in time and PCs became faster and faster in time. Source code that took "ages" now are handled in seconds.
    Just my two cents: could it be that handling the files was handled better by TP in those days?
    With kind regards / met vriendelijke groet, Ruud Baltissen

    www.baltissen.org

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    5,426
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruud View Post
    Just my two cents: could it be that handling the files was handled better by TP in those days?
    It depends on what very early versions of FP were doing. Without seeing your code, there's no way to tell.

    For very early versions of FP, and for specific workloads, it is possible 32-bit protected-mode FP programs were slower when it came to heavy I/O via DOS calls. It is also possible that early versions of FP created much larger code that didn't fit inside the L2 cache of your system, whereas TP did. But those would be only two use cases, which isn't enough to make the blanket statement "a program run under TP7 is about three times as fast as the same program run under FP" as you did. For most compute- or memory-hungry workloads, even a suboptimal 32-bit pmode program should drastically outperform a 16-bit real-mode program
    Offering a bounty for:
    - The software "Overhead Express" (doesn't have to be original, can be a copy)
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Documentation and original disks for: Panasonic Sr. Partner, Zenith Z-160 series
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

  5. #115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trixter View Post
    Without seeing your code, there's no way to tell.
    Not needed, IMHO. I (still) only use two type of files: TEXT for the source and log files and "file of byte" for the generated binaries. For every pass the lines were read and handled one by one. Three passes handle most type of files but if a weird nesting of variables was used, more passes were added. The binaries were generated after the last pass.

    even a suboptimal 32-bit pmode program should drastically outperform a 16-bit real-mode program
    It sounds more than reasonable but... no offense meant or taken but it was what I experienced, I even used my watch to verify numbers. Maybe there were other things that played a role like programs running in the background.
    With kind regards / met vriendelijke groet, Ruud Baltissen

    www.baltissen.org

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    5,426
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Most likely it was your use of TEXT file types without buffers. FP probably had very basic handling of the TEXT type in the early days; it was likely unbuffered.
    Offering a bounty for:
    - The software "Overhead Express" (doesn't have to be original, can be a copy)
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Documentation and original disks for: Panasonic Sr. Partner, Zenith Z-160 series
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •