OpenEuphoria

Re: Oh no, another Euphoria vs. C comparison

• Posted by Robert Craig <rds at ATTCANADA.NET> Aug 14, 2000
• 487 views

Davi Figueiredo writes:

> Rob, would it be possible for you to compile the
> Euphoria version and tell us how it compares to the others?
> I am curious!

When I translate test.ex to C and compile it with WATCOM,
it runs 2.54x faster than when it's interpreted. There are
several places where more optimization of the generated
C is possible, but I want to get a release out before looking
into it.

If you run a time profile on test.ex you should find that
the statement involving xor_bits() and and_bits()
is the biggest time-consumer at about 45% of the
total execution time. The call to and_bits() is not
present in the C version, because the C program
can fortunately take advantage of chars
overflowing at 8 bits.

Another thing that's a bit suspect about the C vs.
interpreter benchmark is that you are including the time for:
      1. loading and decompressing the (relatively large)
          Euphoria interpreter
      2. parsing the entire Euphoria program.
whereas the (relatively small) C program starts
immediately to perform the benchmark task.

Regards,
   Rob Craig
   Rapid Deployment Software
   http://www.RapidEuphoria.com