Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Forums
« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Exec44 Vs exec45  (Read 1842 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AmigaManceTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Posts: 1278
    • Show only replies by AmigaMance
Exec44 Vs exec45
« on: May 02, 2005, 06:21:28 AM »
Hi.
 I wonder which exec.library is the fastest one. The exec44 ( http://piru.dyndns.org/~p/sw/exec44beta4.lha ) or the new exec.library of OS3.9? Exec44 raise some compatibility problems with a few utilities but hell, if it's faster i will use it.

 I also like to know if the OS3.9 library is an updated version of exec44 or these 2 were completely independent projects.
Logged
A1200 PPC user.
 

Offline RedskullDC

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Sep 2003
  • Posts: 136
    • Show only replies by RedskullDC
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2005, 10:03:35 AM »
Hi AmigaMance,

Quote

AmigaMance wrote:
Hi.
 I wonder which exec.library is the fastest one. The exec44 ( http://piru.dyndns.org/~p/sw/exec44beta4.lha ) or the new exec.library of OS3.9? Exec44 raise some compatibility problems with a few utilities but hell, if it's faster i will use it.
 I also like to know if the OS3.9 library is an updated version of exec44 or these 2 were completely independent projects.


Exec44 is a completely independent project by Harry Sintonen.
What kind of compatibility problems have you had?
Been using it here for ages and found it to be rock-solid.

I'd say it would be slightly faster than Exec45, but The OS3.9 setpatch may not not recognise the version number, and hence not install the V45 extensions.

This may be the source of the incompatibilities?

Red
Logged
Redskull @ Digital Corruption
A500, 4000/060-75MHz
WinUAE on Windows7-X64Ult
Minimig DE1
-------------------------
 

Offline AmigaManceTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Posts: 1278
    • Show only replies by AmigaMance
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2005, 01:06:43 PM »
No, the extensions (ram-handler, console.device etc.) are being loaded with exec44. I'm using blizkick for this anyway, not the setpatch command.
 One of the incompatibilities that comes to mind right now (they are not many) is the daterecall utility: It crashes with exec44 but runs ok with 3.0, 3.1 and 3.9 exec libraries.

 So, you do have OS3.9 but you prefer to install exec44 instead, because it's faster, right?
Logged
A1200 PPC user.
 

  • Guest
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2005, 01:37:29 PM »
Quote

AmigaMance wrote:
No, the extensions (ram-handler, console.device etc.) are being loaded with exec44. I'm using blizkick for this anyway, not the setpatch command.
 One of the incompatibilities that comes to mind right now (they are not many) is the daterecall utility: It crashes with exec44 but runs ok with 3.0, 3.1 and 3.9 exec libraries.

 So, you do have OS3.9 but you prefer to install exec44 instead, because it's faster, right?


I had a few problems with using exec441 with blizkick and the stripped bb2 rom updates alongside the bppcfix module.

exec441 is definately a lot faster though.
Logged
 

Offline AmigaManceTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Posts: 1278
    • Show only replies by AmigaMance
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2005, 02:26:49 PM »
Ok, i will use exec44 then.
Oh, i just saw in an older post that the exec of OS3.9 was written in C!.. :o
Logged
A1200 PPC user.
 

  • Guest
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2005, 02:55:09 PM »
Quote

AmigaMance wrote:
Ok, i will use exec44 then.
Oh, i just saw in an older post that the exec of OS3.9 was written in C!.. :o


There's nothing wrong with C, hell the whole of OS4, MorphOS, and AROS is written in C!!! Shock Horror!! :-o ;-)
Logged
 

Offline AmigaManceTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Posts: 1278
    • Show only replies by AmigaMance
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2005, 08:26:56 PM »
 There is nothing wrong with it, except that it's a lot slower than assembly. ;) OS4 and MorphOS runs on PPCs anyway, so C routines should run faster than 68k assembly routines, on these OS.
Logged
A1200 PPC user.
 

  • Guest
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2005, 11:00:08 AM »
Quote

AmigaMance wrote:
 There is nothing wrong with it, except that it's a lot slower than assembly. ;) OS4 and MorphOS runs on PPCs anyway, so C routines should run faster than 68k assembly routines, on these OS.


It's only slower than assembly if you are an assembly guru. Otherwise the compiler should do a better job at optimizing your code than you ever could hope to do yourself. :-D
Logged
 

Offline bloodline

  • Master Sock Abuser
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 12113
    • Show only replies by bloodline
    • http://www.troubled-mind.com
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2005, 02:05:55 PM »
Quote

mdma wrote:
Quote

AmigaMance wrote:
 There is nothing wrong with it, except that it's a lot slower than assembly. ;) OS4 and MorphOS runs on PPCs anyway, so C routines should run faster than 68k assembly routines, on these OS.


It's only slower than assembly if you are an assembly guru. Otherwise the compiler should do a better job at optimizing your code than you ever could hope to do yourself. :-D


I think Piru, qualifies as an "assembly guru"... ;-)
Logged
 

  • Guest
Re: Exec44 Vs exec45
« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2005, 04:05:37 PM »
Quote

bloodline wrote:
Quote

mdma wrote:
Quote

AmigaMance wrote:
 There is nothing wrong with it, except that it's a lot slower than assembly. ;) OS4 and MorphOS runs on PPCs anyway, so C routines should run faster than 68k assembly routines, on these OS.


It's only slower than assembly if you are an assembly guru. Otherwise the compiler should do a better job at optimizing your code than you ever could hope to do yourself. :-D


I think Piru, qualifies as an "assembly guru"... ;-)


Are you quite sure Matt? Should we take a vote? j/k :-D

As I said to someone if a private email recently, if Amiga Inc had asked Piru to single handedly code OS4 in assembly in 2000, we'd have had OS6 by now! ;-)
Logged
 
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »