>> for (char* ptr = 0xd800; ptr != 0xdbe8; ++ptr) { ... } >> >> ...the check for exit condition will be done MSB first. I.e., it would >> compare with 0xdb before comparing 0xe8. >> >> Wouldn't it be so much more efficient if it checks LSB first? Roughly >> MSB will match one out of four times, while LSB only matches one out >> of 256 times. So those second checks could be avoided a lot of times. > > Ok, but what is with > > for (I = 0x0000; I != 0xFF00; I += 0x100) { ... } > > In this case comparing LSB is useless, because the condition is never true. That is indeed true... but increasing by one is so much more common (at least for me). I have just sort of noted this optimization opportunity over and over, now eventually I made the post ;-) Cheers, Johan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Mon Apr 2 12:04:07 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-04-02 12:04:09 CEST