Re: C code .vs. Assembly code for Microcontrollers/DSPs ?

Preston Briggs <preston@scs.rice.edu> writes:


> I find this implied goal of programming to the lowest common
> denominator very depressing.


Since the majority of C compilers do not optimize const or static,
"loweset common denominator" is perhaps better described as "common
denominator".


> If you're using a compiler that has such problems
> (with const, say), you probably shouldn't expect much in the way of
> performance no matter how carefully you contort your code.


This is not consistent with my observations. Consider the following code
fragment:


const int ZERO = 0;
void f (void) { if (ZERO) g{}; }


Analysis of several dozen C compilers suggests the following. If a
compiler can optimize this code fragment, then it probably has a good
optimizer. However, failure to optimize this code fragment says
little about the other optimizations a compiler can support.


Regards,
Christopher Glaeser cdg@nullstone.com
Nullstone Corporation http://www.nullstone.com


--

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