From: groepaz (groepaz_at_gmx.net)
Date: 2001-09-26 20:08:24
Hello Ullrich, UvB> With a really good compiler, it should not be needed to write C code in a UvB> special way to optimize it, but unfortunately cc65 is far from being an UvB> optimizing compiler, so... neither GCC nor MSVC++ is a really good compiler then ,=)))))))))))))) actually, i have seen "optimized c code" for almost every target except the real 'big' ones (x86/SPARC/power-pc and alike) ... i am not blaming this on the compiler though.... from my point of view, i dont expect the compiler to be smarter than me ;=) UvB> So my advice for any C programmer is to use the pre-increment/decrement form UvB> whenever possible. This is even more true for C++ programmers, because in the UvB> case of C++, such an operator may involve generation of a temporary copy of a UvB> class instance, which is even more expensive than the copy of a native data UvB> type. uhh... this is one thing i really didnt know by now ;=) probably GCC handles post/pre inc/dec the same way when that return-value isnt needed (as in, optimizes it away) so that i never stumbled about this ;=) /me gotta read your document again ;=) -- Best regards, groepaz mailto:groepaz_at_gmx.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2001-12-14 22:05:42 CET