On Mar 7, 2007, at 9:46 AM, MacArthur, Ian ((SELEX)) ((UK)) wrote: > >>> Right, that's one of the things I like about your implementation >>> (that and using the ring buffer, which takes me back to my old >>> real-time programming days... :) >> >> Hah, I've been updating some PIC microcontroller code recently. When >> you have 2k of ROM and 105 bytes of RAM, you learn to save. And I >> generally love the concept of lazy evaluation. It matches my way of >> working. > > Well, if we are doing a ring buffer, and worrying about efficiences, > here's my favorite tweak... > > For any case where AWAKE_RING_SIZE is a power of two ...
Yes, I am aware of that. I wanted to keep the ring size flexible at least during the testing phase. But thanks for the hint. > And, while I think of it - does AWAKE_RING_SIZE have the wrong scope? > Should it be static here? Yes, I will fix that. Thanks for pointing it out. Matthias ---- http://robowerk.com/ _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
