From: Dave Bird <dave AT xemu DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.lang.asm.x86,alt.os.assembly
Subject: Re: Benchmarking of NASM
Date: 10 Jul 1999 20:19:01 GMT
Organization: ARS HakeMongers inc...... ><_'> <_"
Lines: 30
Approved: <johnfine AT erols DOT com>
Message-ID: <7m89rl$sum$1@autumn.news.rcn.net>
References: <7m645n$f0a$1 AT autumn DOT news DOT rcn DOT net>
 <7m6ck4$iu0$1 AT autumn DOT news DOT rcn DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: IHF9rIlYnUf7JicrqYFDcX6Qh5laxlDalu52T3vw+cw=
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rcn DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jul 1999 20:19:01 GMT
X-Mozilla-Status:  0801
X-Newsreader:  Turnpike (32) Version 4.01  <dQumtnY$x4rJ2u5tL5fS$n2vuP>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

In article <7m6ck4$iu0$1 AT autumn DOT news DOT rcn DOT net>, Jack Klein
<jackklein AT att DOT net> writes
>> 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.
>
>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???


"Benchmark" is ambiguous about a translation program: it can mean
 tests of run-time efficiency on the process of translating or  
 (if this can vary i.e. compiler not assembler) of translated code.  

 Generally I don't worry how fast the translators I use will run,
 so long as it is not perceptibly and annoyingly slow to me. 


-- 
   ^-^-^-@@-^-;-^   http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/
        (..)__u     news:alt.smoking.mooses