I am back to 0.5.3 (which works fine ) and I noticed that compiling is much, much faster. Were that many new features added to Axe 1?

I am back to 0.5.3 (which works fine ) and I noticed that compiling is much, much faster. Were that many new features added to Axe 1?

Yes, and tons of new features were added, allowing variable names to be longer, forward referencing, a much, much higher variable limit, and other changes.  This translates to slower parsing, but it's more flexible this way.

Actually, the slowdown is entirely due to yet another major feature, the one that required the most core rewriting, which is the peephole optimizations.  The parser now writes commands instruction by instruction instead of byte by byte so it can optimize out any sub-optimal patterns it sees along the way, cutting code size an extra 1-2% and setting it up for future reductions of probably 5% or more.  It should eventually allow you to write code in a more natural way and then automatically convert it to code that is more "Runer Style" as I like to call it

Quote from: mrmprog on July 23, 2011, 08:09:20 am

I am back to 0.5.3 (which works fine ) and I noticed that compiling is much, much faster. Were that many new features added to Axe 1?

Yes, and tons of new features were added, allowing variable names to be longer, forward referencing, a much, much higher variable limit, and other changes.  This translates to slower parsing, but it's more flexible this way.

I did not know we could have longer variable names, that's sweet!

Who can make the most optimized code? Runer with the source, or Quigibo with the parser? 


/cue dramatic music

Quigibo just released Axe 0.0.2, it fixes all the bugs in the 1.0.1

Even though this isn't a new feature, its new in the fact that it's now optimized enough to be useful.  Calc84maniac gave me the idea over chat:

You can use the ternary operator to short circuit a list of conditions for any statement.  For example, instead of doing:
:If A
:If B
:If C
:<code>
:End:End:End
You can now inline the comparisons using the ternary:
:If A?B?C,,
:<code>
:End

These both compile to essentially the same code.  To break it down since its not immediately obvious why these 2 are the same, consider the grouping Axe is doing internally:
If (A?(B?(C),<b is false>),<a is false>)Basically it checks A, if A is false, there is no code, so it returns the last statement evaluated which is 0 since it was false.  If true, it checks B and again returns false if B is false.  Finally, if B is true, it just returns C's condition which will determine if the entire statement is true or false

Its a really nice shorthand! (even though the trailing commas might look ugly)  You can also use it for while and repeat statements which I don't think was possible before.

Yep, instead of If A+B+C, you can do If A?,B?,C