Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: Random numbers et al
From: Blue Chip (cs_bluechip_at_webtribe.net)
Date: 2003-04-07


>>Yes, again, this is a kickback of having to be anal about writing efficient
>>code. The philosophy I have been forced to work with in the past can be
>>summed up by the UK expression "count the pennies and the pounds will take
>>care of themselves."
>
>I do not agree.

That's fair enough, it was a very subjective opinion, my previous
experience is mainly in "critical systems" work. Perhaps it is not as
relevant as I first thought.

>Look what happens in the DSP world, nobody uses assembler for
>the DSP anymore except in some special cases (95% of the CPU usage is
>probably in
>5% of the code, the only worth optimizing).

...yes, this was the bit I was suggesting could be optimised!?

>The code is all written in C because
>the compilers are *good* and the next DSP is only 3 month away. You do not
>want to
>rewrite your assembler stuff all the time. Before spending 6 month to
>optimize your
>code, you can wait 3 month for the more powerfull DSP.

...ccooowelll, is the full info online anywhere? For a start "how
much?" <:-)))
Again, my 'newbie' apologies, I was unaware that you could upgrade the DSP
in these little babies

>One of my students once tried to optimize a loop in assembler, GCC beat
>him by one
>assembler command :-)

One is left only to presume that assembler was not his strong point ;)

Bc



Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa