> Could I have a quick indication of how much faster quantize_xrpow() is over a
> normal quantize(). I've got a few ideas for doing some more stuff to
> quantize(), but if quantize_xrpow is now a better option I'll put my efforts
> into that. (just had a quick peek and there's some asm in there. Mmmm.. :)
> (for starters, the count_bits change in quantize could be put into
> quantize_xrpow.
>
On a sample run on a pentium II 266 (compiled using gcc), quantize() takes
12 sec, while quantize_xrpow() takes 2.56 sec. I'll add some comments to
the function to explain the assembly. The quick explanation is that this
way the repeated setting of the FPU control word to specify the rounding mode
is avoided, resulting in a huge performance gain for this function.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
