C "neatener" - another example (#9)
mark at umcp-cs.UUCP
mark at umcp-cs.UUCP
Mon Feb 27 14:51:09 AEST 1984
Ok. I already sent one mild flame objecting to the "mad neatener",
and trying to quietly argue that C doesn't do nearly so bad a job
as to be called a neatener. But now, claiming that bliss is
better because it uses 3 clrl's where C uses one and two movl's
is just plain wrong. On my vax, movl's are faster than clrl's.
(780 with no FPA.) Not much faster, but enough so that a little
loop doing a million of them does a little better than a little
loop doing a million clrl's, time and time again.
So bliss does it wrong.
--
Mark Weiser
UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!mark
CSNet: mark at umcp-cs ARPA: mark at maryland
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list