Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 20:22:40 +0200 To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com Cc: David Whysong Subject: Re: Optimization question Message-ID: <19990510202240.F10032@cerebro.laendle> Mail-Followup-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com, David Whysong References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Dr H. T. Leung on Mon, May 10, 1999 at 01:07:16PM +0100 X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.2.7 (root AT cerebro) (gcc driver version pgcc-2.93.09 19990221 (gcc2 ss-980929 experimental) executing gcc version 2.7.2.3) From: Marc Lehmann Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 01:07:16PM +0100, Dr H. T. Leung wrote: > If you had read the mailing list archive, it is terribly unfair to people > on the list to cc you replies when you are not on the list. If you want to > ask a question, subscribe, read on for a while, then post (then maybe > unsubscribe). Well, the official policy is to state that you are not on the the list and just post your question. I don't think his particular posting was too annoying, do you? > very simple example, You were doing multipication "Pv1*v01" 4 times; that > means retrieves 2 values from memory, multiply, store it back, done 4 No, it doesn't. This only puts more pressure on the optimizer, but the examples it cannot handle are much more complicated. > defining new variables like this and break down your calculation so that > it doesn't re-do little multiplications like this; This is useless for simple cases. It helps for difficult cases where the compiler cannot optimize for aliasing or similar reasons . -- -----==- | ----==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e| -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | |