Re: High Level Language vs Assembly

Matt <mr@peakfive.com>
10 Mar 2001 15:57:21 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[17 earlier articles]
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly sunni@speakeasy.net (Shankar Unni) (2001-03-04)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly ts3@ukc.ac.uk (T.Shackell) (2001-03-08)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly kszabo@nortelnetworks.com (Kevin Szabo) (2001-03-08)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly tfjellstrom@home.com (Tom Fjellstrom) (2001-03-10)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly samiam@cisco.com (Scott Moore) (2001-03-10)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) (2001-03-10)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly mr@peakfive.com (Matt) (2001-03-10)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-03-10)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-03-10)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl (Toon Moene) (2001-03-12)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly ts3@ukc.ac.uk (Tom Shackell) (2001-03-14)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly jthorn@galileo.thp.univie.ac.at (2001-03-14)
Re: High Level Language vs Assembly tfjellstrom@home.com (Tom Fjellstrom) (2001-03-22)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Matt <mr@peakfive.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 10 Mar 2001 15:57:21 -0500
Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
References: 01-02-094 01-02-101
Keywords: optimize, practice, question
Posted-Date: 10 Mar 2001 15:57:21 EST

> > When I took a compiler class in Grad School, my professor was
> > adamant about the efficiency of code produced by new high level
> > language compilers. He stated that a human assembly language writer
> > was no longer able to compete with these compilers (unless, of course
>


<snip lots of discussion about human vs machine compilers>


I would think talking about how good compilers are in this news group
is like singing to the choir, so let me ask this; how much improvement
is there between non-optimized and highly optimized code? I ask
because in two areas where performance is critical, DSPs and
supercomputing, compilers have a really poor reputation. I've noticed
the difference between non-optimized and optimized to be much greater
for these types of machines than general purpose cpus. If I turn on
all the bells, whistles and preprocessors, and go in there and hand
tune I might get a 30% improvement of code on a workstation. If I do
the same thing on a parallel machine I might find a 500% difference.
30% difference is nice, I really don't care if I gain it or not. So
I'll never write assembly code for a workstation. But 500% is
critical. If I can get that kind of improvement by mucking around in
the code then it's worth it. So I use MPI. Another aspect of this
problem is that sometimes the compiler can get the 500% improvement,
but not always, and usually not without someone reverse engineering
the compiler to give it the code it wants. So maybe the question is
will compilers ever mature enough to not lose the 500% on contorted
architectures like DSPs and parallel computers?


Matt


Post a followup to this message

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