| ??? 01/10/05 13:25 Read: times |
#84648 - Self-modifying code Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Self-modifying code is exactly what makes systematic programmers sick - it is hard to read and understand and easy to go wrong with the slightest change of anything. This is the ultimate example of unmaintainable code.
One instance of Self-modifying code I practiced once many moons ago was a workloop that is modified based on which features are needed to execute the operations parametres. The system was running on a 16bit/64k mini and the $750k output device ran 3% faster than the $300k output device because throughput was software limited. Making the workloop self-modifying established the hardware dependency on throughput and the $750k device ran 400% faster. Half the salespeople got raving mad "now my customer will not need another machine" the other half go happy "now I can sell it based on perfomance". I am NOT an advocate of self-modifying code, but if you have to, you have to. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Use SRAM as code memory. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, but | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| thanks for answer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ibid | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| There are so many options... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Answer partially wrong: Can't Write CODE | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No need for switching | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Oh yes... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Take care - wherewer your code is :-) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Once again thanks | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Self-modifying code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Self-modifying code - good or bad | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Self-modifying code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 90:10 rule | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| In System Programming Application Note | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| In-System v. In-Application Programming | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| IAP v ISP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Philips IAP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
It's easier with Atmel | 01/01/70 00:00 |