BTW that same loop (in a program) consistently takes 8 seconds on CloudT. On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 12:41 AM B 9 <[email protected]> wrote:
> I’m testing only on Linux. I am surprised at the huge difference in time > from leaving off the variable name in the NEXT. I posted a reference SPDCHK > program (in the other thread) so we can all be talking about the same test. > Essentially, it is doing: > > PRINT TIME$: FOR T=1 TO 3535: NEXT: PRINT TIME$ > > Note: I was doing a lot of tests and got tired of waiting 30 seconds, so I > shortened the loop to count to 3535, which takes almost precisely 10 > seconds on a stock Tandy 200. > > I don’t expect super accuracy, just something so that people can design > games in BASIC on the Virtual T and know it’ll be roughly the same > experience on the actual hardware. > > Speaking of emulators: Has anyone else tried out the MAME emulation of the > Model T computers? It is still quite rough (for example, the screen looks > terrible compared to the actual hardware) but its timing does seem to be > accurate. Or rather, its “in game” version of the timing is right — if I > use “PRINT TIME$” as my stopwatch, counting to 3535 the MAME emulated Tandy > 200 thinks it takes ten seconds, however it seems to take longer on my wall > clock. > > —b9 > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 2:33 PM John R. Hogerhuis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Yeah I agree. Between Linux and Windows difference it's likely a bug >> unrelated to I/o waits >> >> -- John. >> >
