On 04.02.2016 16:57, Matthias Bussonnier wrote: >> On Feb 3, 2016, at 13:22, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov.ml at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> An ideal way would be to calculate a hit/miss ratio over time >> for each cached opcode, but that would be an expensive >> calculation. > Do you mean like a sliding windows ? > Otherwise if you just want a let's say 20% miss threshold, you increment by 1 on hit, > and decrement by 4 on miss. Division is expensive. > > On Feb 3, 2016, at 13:37, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze at mail.de> wrote: > >> On 03.02.2016 22:22, Yury Selivanov wrote: >>> One way of tackling this is to give each optimized opcode >>> a counter for hit/misses. When we have a "hit" we increment >>> that counter, when it's a miss, we decrement it. >> Within a given range, I suppose. Like: >> >> c = min(c+1, 100) > > Min might be overkill, maybe you can use a or mask, to limit the windows range > to 256 consecutive call ? Sure, that is how I would have written it in Python. But I would suggest an AND mask. ;-) Best, Sven
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4