Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Hm, doing the same trick in C, it goes down from: 40ms (original) to 3ms (omit the inner loop). This is still the same distance to fpc (v 3.0.0 with -O4 -Ooloopunroll) 185ms (original) to 12ms (omit the inner loop). C is 4 times faster here. Am 14.02.2016 um 12:09 schrieb Michael Van

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On 2016-02-14 11:09, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > Using in: > Found 4816030 tickets. Elapsed time, msec: 23 Wow... well spotted improvement Florian. Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said: > On 2016-02-14 10:23, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > > and if you can life with the fact that -gl is completely bogus. > > I would have thought -gl (or any debug info for that matter) is bogus > with optimisation -O2 or greater. When I specify any -g

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 14.02.2016 um 12:56 schrieb Florian Klaempfl: > No really. It is not a matter of +1 vs. inc but how it is compiled: as > add or lea. And the decision add vs. lea is not straight forward. It > depends on the surrounding code and the exact core. After reading this (especially the comments)

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 14.02.2016 um 13:34 schrieb Serguei TARASSOV: > On 14/02/2016 12:57, fpc-pascal-requ...@lists.freepascal.org wrote: >> Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 12:09:42 +0100 (CET) From: Michael Van Canneyt >> To: >> FPC-Pascal users discussions

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On 14/02/2016 12:44, Florian Klämpfl wrote: Am 14.02.2016 um 13:34 schrieb Serguei TARASSOV: On 14/02/2016 12:57, fpc-pascal-requ...@lists.freepascal.org wrote: In this case even fpc -h would have helped:) But actually, before bothering randomly with command line options, I would just rewrite

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On 14/02/2016 15:01, fpc-pascal-requ...@lists.freepascal.org wrote: Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 13:17:38 +0100 From: Giuliano Colla To: FPC-Pascal users discussions Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark Il 14/02/2016 12:56,

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 14.02.2016 um 16:08 schrieb leledumbo: >> Not so good at all. >> It doesn't explain why C# with IL is significantly better than native >> code generated by FPC. > > I believe the .NET runtime has optimizations that Florian, judging from his > answer a few posts behind, is not willing to

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On 14/02/2016 09:11, Florian Klaempfl wrote: For the record: with a few changes in the compiler I could reduce the execution time of the example significantly . But I won't commit it probably (maybe parts of it): extensive loop unrolling and loop invariant search has normally little advantages

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Does FPC generate different code for Intel (like Core i7) and AMD (like Phenom or so) when taget architecture is set to x86_64, i.e. are there any CPU manufacturer specific optimizations ?   Thanks for reply,   V. __ Od: Florian

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

> Not so good at all. > It doesn't explain why C# with IL is significantly better than native > code generated by FPC. I believe the .NET runtime has optimizations that Florian, judging from his answer a few posts behind, is not willing to commit due to low real world benefit. He seems to have

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On 2016-02-14 12:58, Marco van de Voort wrote: > simply because the code is much slower otherwise. When debugging, speed should be irrelevant really. Most of the times I'll step through code. Can't get slower than that! ;-) Regards, - Graeme - -- fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 13.02.2016 um 11:44 schrieb Serguei TARASSOV: > Hello, > > Here is my little brute-force test for FPC, C and C# compilers. > http://arbinada.com/main/en/node/1532 > > The results are not so good with FPC but I cannot use Delphi to compare > on Linux. > > Could anyone make the series on

Re: [fpc-pascal] Please someone explain this to me

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016, Jürgen Hestermann wrote: Am 2016-02-11 um 14:21 schrieb Sven Barth: If they are just learning the language then they shouldn't poke around in the core units anyway. That's what the documentation and help is for. Back when I started learning TP I didn't have the internet

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 14.02.2016 um 10:23 schrieb Mattias Gaertner: > On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:11:54 +0100 > Florian Klaempfl wrote: > >> [...] >> For the record: with a few changes in the compiler I could reduce the >> execution time of the example significantly . But I won't commit it >>

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

When I change the programm to run inside a procedure (because this would be the more realistic scenario) the performance decreases about 15% - 160ms in global vs 185ms inside procedure. program HappyTickets; uses SysUtils, DateUtils; procedure run; var n1, n2, n3, n4, n5, n6, n7, n8:

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 14.02.2016 um 10:45 schrieb Mattias Gaertner: > On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:35:22 +0100 > Florian Klaempfl wrote: > >> [...] >> Do you think people will bother? Nobody mentioned to the original poster >> so far: >> - that the used FPC is outdated >> - that only -O2 is used

Re: [fpc-pascal] Please someone explain this to me

Am 2016-02-11 um 14:21 schrieb Sven Barth: > If they are just learning the language then they shouldn't poke around in the core units anyway. That's what the documentation and help is for. > Back when I started learning TP I didn't have the internet and I didn't have the sources of the units. I

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Il 14/02/2016 11:09, Florian Klaempfl ha scritto: But actually, before bothering randomly with command line options, I would just rewrite the inner loop. Something like for n7 := 0 to 9 do if n1 + n2 + n3 + n4 - n5 - n6 - n7 in [0..9] then

Re: [fpc-pascal] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Please someone explain this to me

Am 2016-02-14 um 12:28 schrieb Michael Van Canneyt: > There is a difference between learning the language, which implies knowing > what routines are available to you, and understanding how a particular routine works in detail. The latter requires you to study the source code. > For the former,

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:11:54 +0100 Florian Klaempfl wrote: >[...] > For the record: with a few changes in the compiler I could reduce the > execution time of the example significantly . But I won't commit it > probably (maybe parts of it): extensive loop unrolling and

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On 2016-02-14 09:35, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > I do not know if the points above really effect the example, It does. [tmp]$ fpc -O2 -Cr- test.pas Free Pascal Compiler version 3.0.0 [2015/11/16] for x86_64 Copyright (c) 1993-2015 by Florian Klaempfl and others [tmp]$ ./test Found 4816030 tickets.

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Am 2016-02-13 um 21:59 schrieb Paulo Costa: > On my PC with Windows 8.1, fpc 2.6.4 32bits, when I changed the line: > inc(TicketsCount); > to: > TicketsCount := TicketsCount + 1; > the results improved from: > C:\tmp\tests>HappyTickets.exe > Found 4816030 tickets. Elapsed time, msec: 323 > to >

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:35:22 +0100 Florian Klaempfl wrote: >[...] > Do you think people will bother? Nobody mentioned to the original poster > so far: > - that the used FPC is outdated > - that only -O2 is used instead of -O3 (or -O4 with 3.0.0) > - that even FPC 2.6.4

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

Hello, thank all for assistance! Sorry, I was not clear, the series should be ran with all tests _on the same computer_ regardless its hardware capacity and on the _same OS_. That's why I cannot compare with Delphi. So if you have modern Delphi, FPC and maybe .NET on your Windows computer

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

just for fun: build a node.js from the nim language version which runs in 204ms (c version in 44ms). So fpc (185ms) is more close to js than to c in this case import times proc run() = var TicketsCount = 0 var d1 = epochTime() * 1000.0 for n1 in 0 .. 9 : for n2 in 0 .. 9 : for n3

Re: [fpc-pascal] Happy tickets benchmark

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016, Florian Klaempfl wrote: Am 14.02.2016 um 10:45 schrieb Mattias Gaertner: On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:35:22 +0100 Florian Klaempfl wrote: [...] Do you think people will bother? Nobody mentioned to the original poster so far: - that the used FPC is