Re: PowerPC CodePack (Was: Facts about the Java class file format)

"Jean-Francois Brouillet" <jean-francois.brouillet@virgin.net>
8 Nov 1998 23:29:07 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Facts about the Java class file format pilz@ifi.unizh.ch (Markus Pilz) (1998-10-17)
Re: Facts about the Java class file format tlh20@cam.ac.uk (Tim Harris) (1998-10-21)
Re: Facts about the Java class file format pilz@ifi.unizh.ch (1998-10-30)
Re: Facts about the Java class file format albaugh@agames.com (1998-11-01)
Re: PowerPC CodePack (Was: Facts about the Java class file format) zalman@netcom.com (1998-11-06)
Re: PowerPC CodePack (Was: Facts about the Java class file format) peter@baileynm.com (1998-11-08)
Re: PowerPC CodePack (Was: Facts about the Java class file format) jean-francois.brouillet@virgin.net (Jean-Francois Brouillet) (1998-11-08)
Re: PowerPC CodePack (Was: Facts about the Java class file format) zalman@netcom.com (1998-11-12)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Jean-Francois Brouillet" <jean-francois.brouillet@virgin.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.arch,comp.sys.powerpc.tech
Date: 8 Nov 1998 23:29:07 -0500
Organization: Virgin News Service
References: 98-10-108 98-10-129 98-10-171 98-11-018 98-11-042
Keywords: architecture

zalman@netcom.com (Zalman Stern) wrote:
[a very interesting description of code compression reducing PowerPC
code by about 40%]
>-Z-
>[Are ROMs still expensive enough that this kind of hackery is worth it?
>I suppose so if you're building a million chips to put into consumer
>appliances or cars. -John]


Another advantage is that, IMHO, if the code is reduced by 40%, so is
the load on the system bus, and so is reduced the bus bottleneck. I'm
not sure how those 40% translate in speed gain, but I would bet that
demanding less from the real RAM would be noticed somehow...


--
jean-francois.brouillet@virgin.net

Post a followup to this message

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