We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
After testing my interpreter on large programs, I wanted to compare it's performance to other hexagony interpreters.
I believe @SirBogman 's C# interpreter is the standard for the current fastest interpreter.
(Big thank you to SirBogman for his hexagony.net tool without which this project would of been impossible)
I have been running tests in powershell with the Measure-Command command.
Measure-Command
SirBogman's interpreter took on average 327ms to run a Brainfuck hello world (using https://github.com/MeWhenI/Brainfuck-In-Hexagony). My interpreter seemed to average at 125ms.
I do realize that this is not a very good metric and was wondering how to measure performance in a more meaningful way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
After testing my interpreter on large programs, I wanted to compare it's performance to other hexagony interpreters.
I believe @SirBogman 's C# interpreter is the standard for the current fastest interpreter.
(Big thank you to SirBogman for his hexagony.net tool without which this project would of been impossible)
I have been running tests in powershell with the
Measure-Command
command.SirBogman's interpreter took on average 327ms to run a Brainfuck hello world (using https://github.com/MeWhenI/Brainfuck-In-Hexagony). My interpreter seemed to average at 125ms.
I do realize that this is not a very good metric and was wondering how to measure performance in a more meaningful way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: