Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
05/29/02 15:09
Read: times


 
#23606 - RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code
"I also noticed the more complicated and short the code is the more you get chance for errors."

Yes!
It is a common misaprehension that making your 'C' code as terse as possible will give you more efficient object.
With a good, modern optimising compiler there is usually no advantage to cramming everyting into a single expression. It just gives you more chance to fall foul of unexpected side effects, operator precedence, etc, etc

eg, see Erik's comments in this thread:
http://www.keil.com/discuss/docs/thread1525.htm

List of 7 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      
RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      
RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      
RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      
RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      
RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      
RE: Keil: if(x & 0x0f == 0) -> dead code            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List