Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!eutrc3!rcbaps
From: rcbaps@eutrc3.UUCP (Pieter Schoenmakers)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: RISC and emulated languages
Message-ID: <643@eutrc3.UUCP>
Date: 1 May 89 17:28:26 GMT
References: <158@bms-at.UUCP> <2624@scolex.sco.COM>
Reply-To: rcbaps@eutrc3.UUCP (Pieter Schoenmakers)
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Lines: 27

In article <2624@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@scolex.UUCP (Sean Fagan) writes:
>[...]
>Also, there's a good chance that the "benchmark" you saw had many string
>operations; BASIC is good at that, while C isn't (BASIC can also do floating
>point operations in single-precision, while C generally doesn't).  And,
>since (if I remember correctly) the ARM doesn't have a floating-point unit,
>being able to not have to convert from single-precision to double-precision
>(using only software!) can be a *big* win.
>
>In other words, it's not a feature of RISC architecture.

The ARM BASIC V interpreter uses 5byte (non IEEE) floating point arithmic,
without using the FP coprocessor. The C compiler uses the FP coprocessor.
If it is not fitted, the FP Emulator is used. All arithmic is performed
according to IEEE standards in full precision. That takes time.
   Thus to compare the two fully, the FP Coprocessor should be added to the
system.

In other words: It's not a feature (of any architecture).

Tiggr

-- 
| Pieter 'Tiggr' Schoenmakers | What Informix presented to the world as being |
| rcbaps@eutrc3.uucp          | revolutionary is in fact a really bad program |
| rcgbbaps@heitue51.bitnet    | and not even worth one dollar --- about WingZ |
++ All opinions expressed herein which are not quoted are mine! Mine! MINE! +++