On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:42 PM, David Connors <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18 May 2010 14:29, silky <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Dylan Tusler > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Is >= slower than > by itself? > > > > At an assembly level it's a very similar instruction. You'd need to do > > some analysis at a lower level to see if one was really better. > > The number of clocks required to execute a given instruction changes on a > per CPU generation/vendor/architecture basis.
Exactly, that's what I meant by "some analysis". Just trying to answer the direct question. > It'd be nice to think we can all write code that is efficient to that > extreme, but I suspect your application might have better performance gains > by focussing your efforts elsewhere. ;) Agreed, as was said very early in this thread. > -- > David Connors ([email protected]) > Software Engineer > Codify Pty Ltd - www.codify.com > Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417 > 189 363 > V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors > Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact -- silky http://www.programmingbranch.com/
