Scott David Daniels wrote: > Lew wrote: >> Scott David Daniels wrote: >>> the nub of the problem is not on the benchmarks. There is something >>> to be said for the good old daays when you looked up the instruction >>> timings that you used in a little document for your machine, and could >>> know the cost of any loop. We are faster now, but part of the cost of >>> that speed is that timing is a black art. >> >> Those good old days never existed. Those manuals never accounted for >> things that affected timing even then, like memory latency or refresh >> time. > > Well, as Gilbert and Sullivan wrote: > - What, never? > - No, never! > - What, "Never"? > - Well, hardly ever. > Look up the LGP-30. It was quite predictable. It has been a while.
Same for early ARMs. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?u -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
