On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 14:55:53 +0100 Benito van der Zander <ben...@benibela.de> wrote:
>[...] > > That would be quite a slow down. > > Is it? > > I saw no speed difference between > > var x = 1; > for (var i=0;i<100000;i++) x++; > > and > > var x = [1]; > for (var i=0;i<100000;i++) x[0]++; > > in Firefox. Of course not. First of all 100000 is ridiculously small and second the above example is probably optimized by the engine. For example under V8 with 100000000 iterations you get 1.1s and 1.9s. Test with some more real world code. > Perhaps more memory usage Pretty sure more memory usage. > > Isn't speed the main idea of using pointers? > > It would be to port all existing pascal code Like what? What pointer code do you want to port? > > Also what if var and @var are in different units? > > Either it needs full program static analysis, or pointers are only > allowed to something that was used with a pointer in its unit Isn't that a contradiction to "port all existing"? > > You may want to take a look at asm.js, which has a working > > model for emulating pointers in JavaScript. It would be possible to add > > a pas2js target for that. But then again there is webassembly > > as well and it seems to have better support. > > That model looks like quite a slow down The js engines have some optimizations for that model. Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
