🚀 go-pugleaf

Kenneth Bass (kbb@netcom.com) wrote:
> Jeff Lightfoot (jeffml@netcom.com) wrote:

> : Using the 32 bit code on a 16 bit operating system does not make anything
> : faster.  In fact it may even slow things down a bit.  Let me explain why. (I
> : hope I get this right, or its flame time. :-)

> Okay, where did I put that lighter...

> : First of all the Win32s is just a 'thunker'.  It takes the code and makes it
> : usable by the 16bit operating system.  Thunking is term given by Microsoft
> : that explains how at 32bit program is run on 16bit Windows and how a 16bit
> : program will be run on Windows95.  Thunking obviously adds some time (very
> : little?) to the processing of a program.

> "Thunking" - as far as I know - has nothing to do with 32 vs 16 bit
> processing. I believe that it is how MS-Windows manages to have a single
> copy of the code for multiple instances of the application: "thunks" are
> stubs that are called as each sub-routine is called to 'fix-up' the data
> segment registers to point ot the correct data for that particular
> instance.

> And yes it does add some time to program execution, but if you have a 16
> bit OS trying to do 32 bit instructions it will be even longer.

> : Now, feel free to shoot holes in my explaination, I think I did a pretty
> : good job explaining. (yeh, right)

> bang!


Bang yourself -- Jeff Lightfoot was correct.  Win32s does indeed "thunk" 
32-bit calls down to 16 bits, adding overhead that makes 32-bit programs 
that make a lot of system calls (i.e., most Windows programs) run slower 
under Windows 3.1 than 16-bit programs.

For much the same reason, 16-bit programs run slower on a 32-bit operating
system (e.g., Windows NT) then they do on a 16-bit operating systems
(Windows 3.1). 

Best regards,
John  <JNavas@Netcom.com>