From owner-cvs-all  Wed Sep 12  6: 0:15 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 3213437B409; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 06:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA15760;
	Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:00:00 +1000
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:59:38 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender:  <bde@delplex.bde.org>
To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org>,
	Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org>,
	<cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_prf.c src/sys/sys systm.h
In-Reply-To: <20010911170706.A22997@kayak.xcllnt.net>
Message-ID: <20010912225508.W1472-100000@delplex.bde.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <cvs-all.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20cvs-all>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20cvs-all>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 12:30:50AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > Disagreed.  This seems like a normal optimization to me.  It's like
> > replacing strlen("foo") by 3.
>
> None of the so called optimizations are normal in that normally you
> optimize those parts of the program where you have the largest gain
> for the least amount of effort. Replacing strlen("foo") by 3 only
> marginally makes more sense. In any case, I don't believe that GCC
> is at a point where all the big/significant optimizations have been
> implemented, so I fail to see how these optimizations make the code
> better. I don't see value in the fact that my scientific program may
> be twice as slow as the competition, but at least the result is printed
> 7 clocks earlier.

Right.  I didn't say that it was a worthwhile optimization :-).  It's just
an easy one, and has the advantages of being machine-independent and
actually an optimization on all machines (that's for strlen; printf -->
putchar might be a pessimization if putchar is poorly implemented).

Bruce


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message