| ??? 08/01/05 06:00 Read: times |
#98544 - You need a Profiler Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Jan Waclawek said:
It should be possible to decompose the (structured) program into smaller blocks (in a tree form) and determine the worst-case execution time of it ... Will this be useful? I doubt it. There is absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that any particular sequence of source statements will generate any specific set of machine instructions; therefore it is impossible to predict execution timings from 'C' source code. This is the reason why writing delay loops in 'C' is fundamentally flawed. However, automated tools do exist to examine the compiler's output and produce performance reports - called "Profilers" or similar. Although not automated, you could use the Performance Analyser in Keil's simulator/debugger to do this manually. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Counting cycles... possible in C? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You need a Profiler | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The compiler knows | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Source code useless | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That's why you need Assembler! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| nohohoho | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Speed is not everything! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Cycles vary? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I know | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| absolutely, but what good does it do | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| other way round | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, the things posted apply in this cas | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| exactly for this reason | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how can you automate that it is small en | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Use Microsoft Excel | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| excel and conditional branches ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That's why | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
That makes absolutotally no difference, | 01/01/70 00:00 |