 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christoph Hormann
Subject: Re: function optimization question
Date: 19 Mar 2002 11:39:43
Message: <3C9769CB.293D5093@gmx.de>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
> There is no source code package yet, right? And when there is, there will
> be the same documentation I used to find this feature.
>
> That documentation looks something like this:
>
> else if(Token.Token_Id == STRING_LITERAL_TOKEN)
> [...]
This of course was not what i meant, i meant a description of how to write
those assembly instructions. A list of available commands and some
documented samples would help a lot.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 18 Mar. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:39:39 +0100, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>
> Ron Parker wrote:
>>
>> There is no source code package yet, right? And when there is, there will
>> be the same documentation I used to find this feature.
>>
>> That documentation looks something like this:
>>
>> else if(Token.Token_Id == STRING_LITERAL_TOKEN)
>> [...]
>
> This of course was not what i meant, i meant a description of how to write
> those assembly instructions. A list of available commands and some
> documented samples would help a lot.
Oh. Well, you're in luck there. There is a significant amount of
documentation for the bytecode in the appropriate source file.
--
#local R=<7084844682857967,0787982,826975826580>;#macro L(P)concat(#while(P)chr(
mod(P,100)),#local P=P/100;#end"")#end background{rgb 1}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.y)0,0
translate<-.8,0,-1>}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.z)0,0translate<-1.6,-.75,-1>}sphere{z/9e3
4/26/2001finish{reflection 1}}//ron.parker@povray.org My opinions, nobody else's
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christoph Hormann
Subject: Re: function optimization question
Date: 19 Mar 2002 11:46:58
Message: <3C976B7F.FB30FD25@gmx.de>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
> Oh. Well, you're in luck there. There is a significant amount of
> documentation for the bytecode in the appropriate source file.
>
Great.
I'm eagerly waiting to see it...
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 18 Mar. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker <ron### [at] povray org> wrote:
> What, assembly-language-like bytecode isn't good enough for you?
That's luxury!
The only valid input for functions should be opcodes written in hexadecimal!
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > What, assembly-language-like bytecode isn't good enough for you?
> That's luxury!
> The only valid input for functions should be opcodes written in hexadecimal!
I'm wondering, what kind of instruction word this ASM-interpreter uses ...
are they more CISC- or more RISC- like ? ...
BTW: What 'bout self-modifying code ? ... that would be nice ... back to oldschool
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jan Walzer <jan### [at] lzernet> wrote:
> I'm wondering, what kind of instruction word this ASM-interpreter uses ...
> are they more CISC- or more RISC- like ? ...
That depends on how you define CISC and RISC.
I don't think there are really many instructions, so one could say that
it's a "reduced instruction set". However, one typical feature of CISC is
that each instruction takes the same amount of memory and 1 clock cycle to
execute, which I don't think is the case.
> BTW: What 'bout self-modifying code ? ... that would be nice ... back to oldschool
I doubt that you have any possibility of writing to memory.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ca5bf52@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>
wrote:
> > BTW: What 'bout self-modifying code ? ... that would be nice ... back to
> > oldschool
>
> I doubt that you have any possibility of writing to memory.
Depends on what you mean by self modifying...POV-Script could probably
output a function ASM file and then load it as a function.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3ca5bf52@news.povray.org...
> Jan Walzer <jan### [at] lzernet> wrote:
> > I'm wondering, what kind of instruction word this ASM-interpreter uses ...
>
> > are they more CISC- or more RISC- like ? ...
>
> That depends on how you define CISC and RISC.
> I don't think there are really many instructions, so one could say that
> it's a "reduced instruction set". However, one typical feature of CISC is
> that each instruction takes the same amount of memory and 1 clock cycle to
> execute, which I don't think is the case.
That is RISC ... the reduced instructionset normally has every opcode same
length (4Bytes on a 32Bit-architecture (look_at MIPS))... This is the criteria
I wanted to ask. OTOH CISC has different length opcodes, that are interpreted by
an microcode, where normally different runtimes for different ops can be seen ...
... of course, the time, needed for execution of an operation is not necessary the
same for all instructions of a RISC machine, too ...
I see now, that my question was not exactly formulated ...
I better should have asked: will the ASM-code more base on Load-Store-arch (which
is "quite" common for RISC) or will it be more like Work-Direct-In-Mem-arch (which
is more common for CISC) ...
> > > BTW: What 'bout self-modifying code ? ... that would be nice ... back to
> > > oldschool
> > I doubt that you have any possibility of writing to memory.
[CJH]> Depends on what you mean by self modifying...POV-Script could probably
[CJH]> output a function ASM file and then load it as a function.
No ... this is not what I meant ... I mean, that the prog, can modify itself
in memory, to speedup execution ...
... or to make unreadable code ...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: function optimization question
Date: 31 Mar 2002 10:24:09
Message: <3ca72a19@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ca5bf52@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> That depends on how you define CISC and RISC.
> I don't think there are really many instructions, so one could say that
> it's a "reduced instruction set". However, one typical feature of CISC is
> that each instruction takes the same amount of memory and 1 clock cycle to
> execute, which I don't think is the case.
It shows some typical RISC characteristics: Each instruction takes the same
amount of memory (usually 4 bytes or whatever two shorts in a struct will need
depending on the compiler/platform used) and it is designed as load/store
architecture. As for execution time, basic instructions offer somewhere
around 1/10 to 1/20 of the target architecture speed.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ahh ... thx Thorsten ... that's what I wanted to know ...
... YES! ... /me want's this feature, accessible from Userspace (ie. not by patches)
and with _FULL DOCUMENTATION_ ... *g*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
