yukngo@obelix.gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Cheung Yukngo) (08/04/90)
In article <8975@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall) writes: . In article <1990Aug2.090725.2029@tc.fluke.COM> dcd@tc.fluke.COM (David Dyck) writes: . : PS. (I came upon this while trying to convert the 'Lisp interpreter in Awk' . : that was posted to comp.lang.lisp and alt.sources into . : 'Lisp in perl'. After correcting the bug, perl was only a . : little slower that awk). . : . : AWK: real 0m5.03s user 0m4.73s sys 0m0.11s . : PERL: real 0m5.10s user 0m4.78s sys 0m0.21s . . Hmm, not too bad for un-idiomatic Perl. I bet it could be made to . run twice as fast with a little perlish polish. . . Larry I was very interested in the Lisp in Awk program so I converted it to perl with the correction to the foreach loop. I then used shift/unshift operations in perl to implement the stacks in the program. Well, the program was more than twice as fast as the program in awk, when I tested them on one of our Sun3 machines. (The run time is totally unaccepted for the program to be useful.) perl: 19.9 real 18.4 user 1.0 sys awk: 42.7 real 41.9 user 0.2 sys Then I copied the program to our MIPS machine. The original version was still about 8% faster than the perl version. (Without the improvement, it was 50% slower) perl: real 2.7 user 2.5 sys 0.2 awk: real 2.5 user 2.5 sys 0.0 I am a bit confused. Does MIPS have a super-awk?