Re: Sudoku puzzle solver for Apple II

["Bryan Parkoff" <nospam@nospam.com>]

"Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message 
XtudnVI15qUVVCnZnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@comcast.com">news:XtudnVI15qUVVCnZnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Scott Hemphill and I recently collaborated to create a Sudoku puzzle
> solver for Apple II computers.  The machine language solver is Scott's,
> with some adaptations by me, and I wrote the interactive Applesoft
> front-end.
>
> SUDOKU runs on any Apple II with 80-column firmware and a 65C02
> processor, which includes the IIc, the IIc+, the Enhanced //e, and
> the IIgs.
>
> It is amazingly fast!  Most Sudoku solvers run on modern PCs thousands
> of times faster than a 1MHz Apple II, and take seconds to solve a
> puzzle, but Scott's solver is so time and space efficient that it
> solves puzzles in seconds *running on an Apple II*!
>
> Check it out at:
>
> http://members.aol.com/mjmahon/Sudoku.html
>
> It is available both as a ShrinkIt disk archive and as a .dsk image.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> (BTW, the execution profile referred to in the paper has not yet
> been uploaded, so for the time being, that's a 404. ;-)
>
> -michael
>
> Fast Sudoku solving for Apple II's!
> Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/
>
> "The wastebasket is our most important design
> tool--and it is seriously underused."

Michael,

    I understand that space saving memory and efficient optimization on 
6502/65C02 processor is best choice.  How do you assume that optimized 
Sudoku solving writted in x86 assembly and 6502/65C02 assembly might have 
the impact speed?  Is it possible that x86 assembly runs at 1GHz might be 
faster or almost close to the same speed to 6502/65C02 assembly at 1MHz?
    One paragraph of your website states that optimization is evil.  I guess 
that many programmers and designer of processor are not smart enough to 
study space saving memory and efficient optimization when they should try to 
write algothrims in smaller functions.
    I expect them to spend extra time and money to write advanced x86 
assembly rather than high level language so they can write PC Operating 
System and games.  They can outperform better.  It is wasting time and money 
to develop modern x86 processors by trying to improve and increase the speed 
while they forget all the optimization.  It is too much dependant on speed 
without optimization so software may operate little fair or poor speed.
    How could you predict if improved processor under the design of 6502 may 
run at 1GHz with 32 bits and 64 bits?  They may have better space saving 
memory and efficient speed than x86 processors.  If it does exist, 
programmers may expect modern emulator projects to be written in 6502 
assembly might be slower than x86 processor like RISC processor.  Do you 
expect?

Bryan Parkoff