Author Topic: Relative speed of Lua?  (Read 7614 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ingalls

  • LV3 Member (Next: 100)
  • ***
  • Posts: 49
  • Rating: +4/-0
  • :)
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2011, 09:18:53 am »
Also, I hate TI hating linux. :( Not supported :P

I know what you mean! I run linux on all of my computers except for one that runs windows. The only thing I use windows for is nspireLink, notepad for lua and LUAtoTNS.... I sometimes wish I had a mac that I could dual boot linux OSX

Offline jnesselr

  • King Graphmastur
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2270
  • Rating: +81/-20
  • TAO == epic
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2011, 12:06:01 pm »
Also, I hate TI hating linux. :( Not supported :P

I know what you mean! I run linux on all of my computers except for one that runs windows. The only thing I use windows for is nspireLink, notepad for lua and LUAtoTNS.... I sometimes wish I had a mac that I could dual boot linux OSX
I do! And windows as well!  Which is very fun, b/c the most I've ever run is one virtualized windows, one virtualized linux, mac native, netbeans and safari.  I love spaces too...

Offline GB

  • LV4 Regular (Next: 200)
  • ****
  • Posts: 147
  • Rating: +15/-3
  • Use Microhard WindOS today!
    • View Profile
    • MICROHARD CORPORATION
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2011, 12:43:44 pm »
I don't care too much for Mac computers. They're just too overpriced for what they are. Running a Hackintosh is better.
TI-86 USER
CASIO PRIZM USER
TI-NSPIRE USER
TI-84 PLUS SILVER EDITION USER
TI-83 PLUS USER

PROJECTS:

Microhard Paint
http://www.omnimaga.org/index.php?topic=11915.0

TI-Nspire Character Map
http://www.omnimaga.org/index.php?topic=7725.msg142555#msg142555

Offline ingalls

  • LV3 Member (Next: 100)
  • ***
  • Posts: 49
  • Rating: +4/-0
  • :)
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2011, 01:44:56 pm »
Yes a good hackintosh is really nice. For awhile I  wanted one just for the multitouch trackpad, it's one of the best on the market but since apple released the standalone desktop trackpad, the linux community has created drivers for it so I should really just buy one for my linux box...

Offline jnesselr

  • King Graphmastur
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2270
  • Rating: +81/-20
  • TAO == epic
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2011, 02:02:59 pm »
True, they are very expensive.  Although they are generally nice computers as well.

Offline willrandship

  • Omnimagus of the Multi-Base.
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2953
  • Rating: +98/-13
  • Insert sugar to begin programming subroutine.
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2011, 03:13:56 pm »
But I can make nicer ones for less by hand :P and I can't think of a mac benefit that doesn't happen through linux, for myself anyhow. (except TI link support :P)

Offline z80man

  • Casio Traitor
  • LV8 Addict (Next: 1000)
  • ********
  • Posts: 977
  • Rating: +85/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2011, 06:04:30 pm »
Well, the Calc is at least 15 times more powerful. ARM vs z80, ARM wins. even if the z80s were 150 mhz, they would still lose.

Partly, but not fully, because it has automatic multiplication (in z80, we have to do multiplication ourselves!)
In how many cycles can the ARM do multiplication? As an example the SH4A can do 32 *32 = 64, 32 * 32 = 32, @32 * @32 = 32 in 2 cycles. And it does 16 * 16 = 32 in 1 cycle. This is of course only when it is written properly. Otherwise it is 5 cycles and 3 cycles respectively.

And for the linux thing. Is it possible to use wine for the nspire link support and LUAtoTNS.

List of stuff I need to do before September:
1. Finish the Emulator of the Casio Prizm (in active development)
2. Finish the the SH3 asm IDE/assembler/linker program (in active development)
3. Create a partial Java virtual machine  for the Prizm (not started)
4. Create Axe for the Prizm with an Axe legacy mode (in planning phase)
5. Develop a large set of C and asm libraries for the Prizm (some progress)
6. Create an emulator of the 83+ for the Prizm (not started)
7. Create a well polished game that showcases the ability of the Casio Prizm (not started)

Offline ingalls

  • LV3 Member (Next: 100)
  • ***
  • Posts: 49
  • Rating: +4/-0
  • :)
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #22 on: April 23, 2011, 06:12:56 pm »
If you go on over to hackspire there is a lua2tns program, I don't know if it is the exact same one as you are thinking but in short yes there is an easy way to get lua to tns on linux. I haven't tried tilink on wine but from past experience wine programs can't usually connect to external devices (At least with all of the programs I've ever tried) It's always worth a shot though! Give me a shout if you get it working!


Offline calc84maniac

  • eZ80 Guru
  • Coder Of Tomorrow
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2898
  • Rating: +467/-17
    • View Profile
    • TI-Boy CE
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #23 on: April 23, 2011, 07:15:29 pm »
Well, the Calc is at least 15 times more powerful. ARM vs z80, ARM wins. even if the z80s were 150 mhz, they would still lose.

Partly, but not fully, because it has automatic multiplication (in z80, we have to do multiplication ourselves!)
In how many cycles can the ARM do multiplication? As an example the SH4A can do 32 *32 = 64, 32 * 32 = 32, @32 * @32 = 32 in 2 cycles. And it does 16 * 16 = 32 in 1 cycle. This is of course only when it is written properly. Otherwise it is 5 cycles and 3 cycles respectively.
The ARM9EJ-S processor does the following multiplications (with optional accumulate operand):
32-bit = 16-bit*16-bit (signed only, 1-2 cycles)
32-bit = (32-bit*16-bit)>>16 (signed only, 1-2 cycles)
32-bit = 32-bit*32-bit (2-3 cycles)
64-bit = 32-bit*32-bit (signed or unsigned, 3-4 cycles)
64-bit += 16-bit*16-bit (signed only, 2-3 cycles)


Also, these instructions use the general-purpose registers as destinations.
"Most people ask, 'What does a thing do?' Hackers ask, 'What can I make it do?'" - Pablos Holman

Offline willrandship

  • Omnimagus of the Multi-Base.
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2953
  • Rating: +98/-13
  • Insert sugar to begin programming subroutine.
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #24 on: April 23, 2011, 07:29:53 pm »
@z80man, no, WINE can't do hardware. There is TilP tho, and there's a Linux version of Lua2TI.

Unfortunately, OS 3.0 can't send with TilP. Can't test for the docs.

Offline Hot_Dog

  • If you can't find a cat, look for its tail.
  • CoT Emeritus
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2966
  • Rating: +445/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2011, 07:31:27 pm »
@Hot Dog how is automatic multiplication a bad thing? Hardware multiplication would be faster, not slower, than software based methods.


I actually said automatic multiplication was a good thing.  I was insulting the z80
There are people who can speak two languages, and they are called bilingual.  There are people who speak three languages and are therefore trilingual.  Then there are people who speak one language, and these people are called Americans.


Offline Lionel Debroux

  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2135
  • Rating: +290/-45
    • View Profile
    • TI-Chess Team
Re: Relative speed of Lua?
« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2011, 01:14:25 am »
For now, I didn't spend time debugging and fixing TILP for sending OS 3.0 - but as we watch the stories of huge problems with OS 3.0 unfold, I don't think that it's much of a problem that TILP will refuse to send that crap :)


Coming back to the earlier posts of the topic: Python is actually not too fast ;)
The VM is fairly heavyweight, and (due to a combination of the VM's performance, and the way user code is written) performance of a number of Python programs, e.g. various Linux distro package managers, is known to be lackluster. I remember about some operations of one of the package managers being more than an order of magnitude faster in C++ than in Python...
« Last Edit: April 24, 2011, 01:27:23 am by Lionel Debroux »
Member of the TI-Chess Team.
Co-maintainer of GCC4TI (GCC4TI online documentation), TILP and TIEmu.
Co-admin of TI-Planet.