From: bc@freeuk.com   
      
   On 27/10/2025 12:50, bart wrote:   
      
   >     Lua 5.4         0.65   
      
   > Here's an example not related to my stuff:   
   >   
   >    c:\cx>tim tcc lua.c   
   >    Time: 0.120   
   >   
   > This builds the Lua intepreter in 1/8th of a second. Now, Tiny C   
   > generally produces indifferent code (ie. slow). Still, I get this result   
   > from my benchmark:   
   >   
   >     Lua 5.4         0.65        (lua.exe built using Tiny C)   
   >   
   > It's still at least FIVE TIMES FASTER than A68G!   
      
   Oops! I forgot to update the timing after copying that line. The proper   
   figure should be:   
      
         Lua 5.4         1.5  seconds   
      
      
   So, sorry it's only 3 times as fast as A68G! And only twice as fast as   
   compiled A68G code, if you forget about the latter's compilation time.   
      
   Here, also, you can build the Lua interpreter from source each time   
   (adding 0.12 seconds), and it would *still* be faster than A68G.   
      
   Not impressed? I thought not.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)