| ??? 08/22/05 13:51 Read: times |
#99821 - So start a new thread, then! Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Kunaal Lagwankar said:
Even though the above problem has been solved, I wish to find out if there are specific pointers for optimization for speed and code size. So start a new thread on that subject - rather than hijacking this one! You could easily include a link to reference this thread. But, before starting any new thread, always use the 'Search' facility first - especially in this case, as the subject has already been discussed countless times!! :-( Also, wouldnt use of sprintf be wiser rather than implementing all the logic ? If you wanted the full, 100% functionality of sprintf, there would be no point in writing your own functions - but have you ever used all of the functionality of sprintf...? That's the point, as Dan hinted - sprintf is a very, very powerful function and, therefore, quite large. It is also constrained by the requirements of the ANSI standard. So, if you don't want all the functionality of sprintf, and/or don't need/want strict ANSI compliance, you may well be able to benefit from writing your own functions. See: http://www.keil.com/discuss/docs/thread2741.htm |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Keil C51-optimization & Pointers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Bad array index | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| oops!! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| buff[] is auto, not static | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Back to basics | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Don't shoot the pianist! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hex file size | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Optimization pointers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sprintf() is fairly large | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| So start a new thread, then! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| pls...help | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I disagree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| My dear Watson ! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| One size fits all | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| bin = hex / 2.8 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| hexmap | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| A bit of a sweeping generalisation!! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil C51-optimization & Pointers | 01/01/70 00:00 |