3 ms·
> Although Tiny Basic is tiny, if the IL interpreter generally fits into the primary CPU cache with its IL, while the much larger native code does not, the IL c
by timbit42 9y ago
> Although Tiny Basic is tiny, if the IL interpreter generally fits into the primary CPU cache with its IL, while the much larger native code does not, the IL code will execute at native CPU speed while the native code thrashes much slower.
Caches are larger today than in 2006.
- acqq 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M Pentium M, introduced 2003, 1 MB L2. Since 2004: 2 MB L2. I'm quite sure the TinyBasic was slower than the "properly written" interpreter even in 2006, even comparing on the 256 MB L2 cache CPU. Lua language exists since 1993, it was actually tiny enough and fast from the start.