On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 07:07:44PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote: > On Mon, 13 May 2002, Greg Stein wrote: > > > Well, the *compiler* might not, but it can inline the assembler forms which > > do optimized copies (e.g. whole words at a time). > > That's what loop unrolling and memory access coalescing are for. :)
And until you can guarantee that *all* compilers are sophisticated enough to do that, it will be safer to hope for inlined code and for super-optimized library functions. > > We really cannot continue to add complexity to the codebase every time we > > want another 1% improvement. We'll end up with an unmaintainable codebase; > > it'll run wicked fast, but we won't be able to fix or improve it. > > A point... and the reason I said +0 and not +1. Sure.... The statement was more aimed at the "performance at all costs" nuts. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
