Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer.

"Brian W. Inglis" <71511.3711@CompuServe.COM>
16 Jul 1997 22:50:57 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[15 earlier articles]
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (1997-07-09)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (1997-07-09)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. monnier+comp/compilers/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu (Stefan Monnier) (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. dietz@interaccess.com (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. cef@geodesic.com (Charles Fiterman) (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. nino@complang.tuwien.ac.at (Marinos Yannikos) (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. 71511.3711@CompuServe.COM (Brian W. Inglis) (1997-07-16)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Brian W. Inglis" <71511.3711@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 16 Jul 1997 22:50:57 -0400
Organization: Systematic Software
References: 97-07-062
Keywords: assembler, optimize, practice

When comparing manual assembly code to compiled code, we are comparing
the production of machine instructions by:


a person knowledgeable about the machine architecture for a fairly
specialized task, and few restrictions (imposed by any requirements to
call OS services) on how the architecture may be used to accomplish
the task (get it right, avoid machine model dependencies and avoid
exceptions);


a fast and sophisticated program which limits the use of the machine
by the conventions assumed by the compiler writers, the interface to
the runtime library and the OS, and the requirement to generate code
that is correct in the general case, rather than just the task at
hand.


For minimal code size or speed of execution on a specialized task,
manual assembly code is the way to program. For speed of problem
solving or more handling more generalized input, higher level
languages are to be preferred. Personally, I like to use interpreted
languages (in the UNIX sense) where possible, compiled languages where
higher speed or otherwise unavailable functionality is required, and
assembly language where I have no other choice.


--
Take care.
Thanks,
Brian Inglis
Brian_Inglis@CompuServe.COM
--


Post a followup to this message

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