Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Random numbers et al
Re: Random numbers et al
From: Blue Chip <cs_bluechip_at_webtribe.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 09:19:01 +0100
>>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
>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
>rewrite your assembler stuff all the time. Before spending 6 month to
>code, you can wait 3 month for the more powerfull DSP.
...ccooowelll, is the full info online anywhere? For a start "how
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 ;)
Received on 2003-04-07