Re: High Level Language vs Assembly

Max Hailperin <max@max.mcs.gac.edu>
25 Feb 2001 10:58:59 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[3 earlier articles]
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly sophie.wilson@broadcom.com (Sophie Wilson) (2001-02-23)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly iank@idiom.com (2001-02-23)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly thp@hill.cs.ucr.edu (Tom Payne) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly rhyde@transdimension.com (Randall Hyde) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly max@max.mcs.gac.edu (Max Hailperin) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr (jacob navia) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly tej@melbpc.org.au (Tim Josling) (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly henry@spsystems.net (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (2001-02-25)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly ts3@ukc.ac.uk (T.Shackell) (2001-03-01)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly samiam@cisco.com (Scott Moore) (2001-03-01)
[15 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Max Hailperin <max@max.mcs.gac.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 25 Feb 2001 10:58:59 -0500
Organization: HickoryTech Internet
References: 01-02-094 01-02-101
Keywords: assembler, performance
Posted-Date: 25 Feb 2001 10:58:59 EST

Jim Granville <jim.granville@designtools.co.nz> writes:


....
> He is largely correct: At the most detailed, hand ASM can lead, but it
> is an unsustainable effort across a whole project, and more commonly
> is counter productive....


One interesting phenomenon I've observed (but for which I have no hard
data) is that the assembly advantage is unsustainable in *two* senses:
not only across a large program, but also across the lifetime of a
long-lived program that undergoes changes. The efficiency of the
assembly code seems to deteriorate fairly quickly as it is patched,
because no one is willing to go back to square one and globally
re-optimize all the things that were carefully optimized for the
initial circumstances. Instead, the patch is done in as local a
fashion as possible, being careful not to disturb anything else. -max


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.