From: jackklein AT att DOT net (Jack Klein)
Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.lang.asm.x86,alt.os.assembly
Subject: Re: Benchmarking of NASM
Date: 10 Jul 1999 02:53:56 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 29
Approved: <johnfine AT erols DOT com>
Message-ID: <7m6ck4$iu0$1@autumn.news.rcn.net>
References: <7m645n$f0a$1 AT autumn DOT news DOT rcn DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: C3Vav36DLwl+dsUThUWsVK3G/T+j5u5Ay8iZ94hnYx8=
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rcn DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jul 1999 02:53:56 GMT
X-Mozilla-Status:  0801
X-Newsreader:  Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On 10 Jul 1999 00:29:43 GMT, hardwork AT freemail DOT c3 DOT hu wrote in
alt.lang.asm:

> Please forgive me if this has been mentioned before.
> 
> Is there any benchmark we can run to compare the performance of NASM with
> other x86 assemblers like A86, MASM, TASM and OPTASM?
> 
> Thank you for your time.

<Jack>

This strikes me as a really silly question, but perhaps I am
misinterpreting so I will ask what is for sure a silly question.

Exactly what kind of benchmarks are you concerned with?

When one talks about benchmarking C compilers, or C++ compilers, for
example, one is usually talking about the size and execution speed of
the program produced by the compiler from a given set of source files.

Surely you are not asking this about assemblers???

</Jack>
-- 
Home: http://home.att.net/~jackklein
New Stuff: http://home.att.net/~jackklein/newstuff.html
Updated 5-Jul-1999