 | | Re: Speed of RCX interpreting bytecodes: slow
|
|
(...) What is in a "counter loop iteration" ? Please share the NQC program you used to measure this with us. I fail to believe that a simple loop runs this slow. 16000 cycles per loop iteration does not sound right to me. -Kekoa (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Speed of RCX interpreting bytecodes: slow
|
|
(...) From memory, the NQC was: int count; task main() { count = 0; CreateDatalog(100); ClearTimer(Timer(0)); while (count <= 1024) { if (count & 0xff == 0) AddToDatalog(Timer(0)); count += 1; } } The downloaded datalog will show the last log entry (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Speed of RCX interpreting bytecodes: slow
|
|
Its been a long time since I looked at the firmware in detail, but is it possible that the bytecode interpreter is driven from one of the timer chains? If this was the case, it wouldn't matter if the CPU could execute the bytecode in 200 cycles...it (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Speed of RCX interpreting bytecodes: slow
|
|
(...) Hmm. If so, an interesting option for a theoretical replacement-but- compatible firmware to have would be the ability to do things as fast as possible. (Of course, it'd have to be an option, since it's possible that some badly-designed code (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Speed of RCX interpreting bytecodes: slow
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure this is not the case. The interpreter constantly runs the "execute bytecode" function if it is sitting idle. -Kekoa (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
