Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Didn't get much response
... so I'm responding to myself ;) I've checked in docs/nanoparrot.c. While it should be a document showing, how the interpreter actually performs its work, it also allows comparison of the additional performance penalty of the indirect register access. Its around 1% (OS X) up to 3% (athlon/linux). This impact would be on function-based cores only and is worst case. Other opcode functions burn much more cycles, so that the one additional assembler instruction does harm less. leo
