| ??? 12/12/02 01:57 Read: times |
#34295 - RE: assembler faster than C |
<html>
and, since speed is an issue, while you are checking the assembly listing note how much unnecessary code the compiler puts in .... and consider moving most-executed code to hand-optimized assembly ... i wonder if a compiler that was free to completely rebuild all modules every time would not insert so much glue code ... now i've had so much fun typing notes in that i've gone and burned the casserole ... well, just around the edges .... <table><tr><td>james</td><td> www.jameshinnant.com</td></tr></table> </html> |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Checking 1 bit in a byte Faster than Dan | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking 1 bit in a byte Faster than Dan | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: assembler faster than C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking 1 bit in a byte Faster than Dan | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Checking 1 bit in a byte ... Erik | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Checking one bit, in a byte Fast | 01/01/70 00:00 |