[Vm-dev] [ANN] SqueakJS
johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com
Mon Dec 23 00:00:05 UTC 2013
On a Iivx which is a 32mhz machine 68030 with an older VM 2.6 I got
248,632 bytecodes/sec and 10,885 sends a second.
A Quadra 950 a 66Mhz 68040 with Linux 2.0.38 does 1,219,512 and 58,368. But
I found the GCC compiler under Linux produced code that was about 50%
better than the MetroWerks CW version. On the same machine under Mac OS it
only does 859,845 and 40,106. At this speed its quite workable and you
can do most things with Squeak.
After upgrading my IIvx with a 50Mhz 68030 CPU upgrade card and using the
latest VM I get 504,286 and 17,958. At this speed things are slow but not
too bad, but don't attempt any 3D work. Just think back 6 years and the
response time doesn't really hurt. It depends on what you want to do, MVC
work is just fine.
PS a SE/30 does 135,135 and 4,722 which I deem to be rather slow! But
having the latest VM work on this machine is a tribute to all involved.
BTW my PowerBook 500Mhz does 46,613,255 bytecodes/sec; 1,542,241 sends/sec
using the latest VM with my modification compiled with CW Pro 5.
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 11:50 AM, J. Vuletich (mail lists) <
juanlists at jvuletich.org> wrote:
> This is absolutely beautiful!
> Performance figures are rather modest:
> Safari: 3,401,360 bytecode/s 127,111 sends/s
> Firefox: 4,232,804 bytecode/s 152,003 sends/s
> Chrome: 1,860,465 bytecode/s 76,859 send/s
> StackVM: 623,250,152 bytecode/s 13,392,546 sends/s
> But still, MVC is _very_ usable. I could even set display depth to 32bpp,
> and play with mandalas and such in full color. Wonderful!
> This makes me think... Maybe MVC could still be useful as a low overhead
> UI for servers that usually run headless, very low power hardware, etc...
> Juan Vuletich
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. Twitter: squeaker68882
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Vm-dev