1. Re: Euphoria To C -- I\\\'m Back!
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at ATTCANADA.NET>
Sep 07, 2000
-
Last edited Sep 08, 2000
> Anyways, Robert, it took me 30 minutes of waiting
> just to compile Mic's gouraud.ex
That happens to be one of 3 or 4 contributed programs
that I couldn't compile either. Watcom 10.6 gives me a
message saying main_.c is too big, break it up.
For you, Watcom probably got hung up.
I'll see what I can do about it.
The translator will try to break a
large .c into a bunch of smaller ones, but I need to tune
the algorithm a bit. (The programmer could also try to
break things up a bit.)
> WTF am I doing wrong here?
> (read: prolly nothing other than that I don't have
> Causeway installed and use DOS4GW instead)
Your sieve.ex results look ok, maybe a bit too good for the
translator. Your other results don't look right.
I tried shell.ex on my machine using Watcom 10.6 and DOS4GW.
(I simply editted objfiles.lnk, changed "system Causeway" to
"system DOS4G", then ran emake.bat again, and shell.exe again.
Shell was about 4.5x faster than with the interpreter.
There's probably something misconfigured with your
"freeware" (pirated?) partial installation of Watcom.
You should use the same compile and link flags as me,
except for "system DOS4G".
> And yes Rob, Pixel() is 2 to 4 times slower
It wasn't for me, using DOS4GW or Causeway.
I hope you aren't including the delay of several seconds
at the start of execution (in your free version).
You should call time() before and after the loop.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
