Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!mrspoc!starnet!sschaem From: sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Lemmings - a tutorial Part V (last) Message-ID: <1991Apr2.090315.27856@starnet.uucp> Date: 2 Apr 91 09:03:15 GMT References: <781@tnc.UUCP> <1991Mar31.003933.1483@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Organization: Starnet-Public Access UNIX-Los Altos,CA 415-949-3133, login:info Lines: 28 About C assembler output... A year ago 15% was the accepted number about C/assembly speed diference. (I'm talking about 68000 code...) But if you look what people are using untill now its not a pretty seen. And why would use a C compiler when you know you will never port your code? And why would you use a C compiler on a 680x0 machine? Check out some MANX C/asm source... does it make any sence? declaring variable as register, having restriction, continional assembly etc... So if you do amiga tools only, dont you think C is a little to mutch? Also the mulu #17 exaMPLE should be optimized by a macro assembler has a C compiler (macro seembler should let you decide...). And n C like in ASM people use mulu table for cycles sucking subroutines... But lets get the the question: what do C offer over a NON clasic motorola macro assembler? I assume we are not talking of multy platform port... I know just a little about C, but still know how to write a simple paint program in it.I usally read C to converte it to ASM, like I done on some IRIS C source for image decompacting. (Just in cases somebody care, or would ask:-)