Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:08:01 +0100 (CET)

   --- paint-funcs.c.orig       Thu Nov 29 14:17:47 2001
   +++ paint-funcs.c    Tue Dec  4 21:53:49 2001
   @@ -343,7 +343,8 @@
      gdouble  sigma2;
      gdouble  l;
      gint     temp;
   -  gint     i, n;
   +  guint    i;
   +  gint     n;

      sigma2 = 2 * sigma * sigma;
      l = sqrt (-sigma2 * log (1.0 / 255.0));

   will lead to that difference in PPC assembly:

That's nice.  Will that single removed instruction even be noticeable
when compared to the square root and the log 2 lines down?

   >> Bad luck, not from me.
   > that, I call ignorance.

   That I'd call lack of time and interest.

You're the one trying to prove that it makes a significant
difference.  It's your responsibility to do the necessary

   > I'd say it's up to you at this point to proove your arguments. I've
   > done my homework and benchmarked the use of unsigned vs. signed.

   Don't even try to catch a difference using a synthetic microbenchmark;
   do it on real code and you will see that it makes a difference.

Fine.  Prove it the old fashioned way -- by benchmarking it.

Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Tall Clubs International  -- or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project lead for Gimp Print/stp --

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to