Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer.

jbuck@synopsys.com (Joe Buck)
24 Jun 1997 23:45:33 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. gclind01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (1997-06-15)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. disc@disclink.com (DISC) (1997-06-19)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. cliffc@risc.sps.mot.com (Cliff Click) (1997-06-19)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. gmiller@iswt.com (Greg Miller) (1997-06-20)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. lehotsky@tiac.net (1997-06-20)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. rnordier@iafrica.com (Robert Nordier) (1997-06-24)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. jim-neil@digital.net (1997-06-24)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. jbuck@synopsys.com (1997-06-24)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. bromage@cs.mu.oz.au (1997-06-30)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. charles.marslett@tempe.vlsi.com (1997-06-30)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. graham.hughes@resnet.ucsb.edu (Graham C. Hughes) (1997-06-30)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. WStreett@shell.monmouth.com (1997-06-30)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. creedy@mitretek.org (1997-06-30)
Re: optimizing compiler against iaverage assembly programmer. als@tusc.com.au (1997-07-04)
[5 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: jbuck@synopsys.com (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.asm.x86
Date: 24 Jun 1997 23:45:33 -0400
Organization: Synopsys Inc., Mountain View, CA 94043-4033
References: 97-06-071 97-06-078
Keywords: optimize, assembler

Greg Miller <gmiller@iswt.com> writes:
>Well, I've never seen a compiler that was better than a typical
>assembly coder, but the truth is that the costs of coding in assembly
>don't pay for the benefits. Hand-coded assembly tends to be a little
>faster, but not enough to make it worth the effort.


Except in embedded fixed-point digital signal processing applications,
where the difference in both speed and code size are still a factor of
four or so. In a high-volume application, no one can afford to use
four times the ROM and four times the processor speed.


For this reason, there's still a lot of hand-written assembly language
being produced: an internal study done a few years back at a large
telecom company reported that fully 1/3 of engineering person-hours
were being spent on writing it. The 90/10 rule will permit using a
HLL in most places other than critical inner loops to meet time
constraints, but memory size constraints mean that code bloat is a
problem for all code.
--
-- Joe Buck http://www.synopsys.com/pubs/research/people/jbuck.html
--


Post a followup to this message

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