Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!hp4nl!rulway.LeidenUniv.nl!rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl!breemen From: breemen@rulcvx.LeidenUniv.nl (E. van Breemen) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Lemmings - a tutorial Part V (last) Message-ID: <1991Apr5.105353.1194@rulway.LeidenUniv.nl> Date: 5 Apr 91 10:53:53 GMT References: <1991Apr2.002631.22799@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Apr2.091947.27988@starnet.uucp> Sender: root@rulway.LeidenUniv.nl (System PRIVILEGED Account) Organization: Leiden University, the Netherlands. Lines: 30 Nntp-Posting-Host: rulcvx.leidenuniv.nl In article dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon) writes: >In article <1991Apr2.091947.27988@starnet.uucp> sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem) writes: >> >>And when I think of C I think only of 15% slower for general coding >>and asm for crytical parts... > > ok, so? That seems about right to me for general coding. Now put the > core code in assembly and leave the rest in C.. what do you get? > > On the otherhand, for medium to large programs it can take 10 times > as long to do it in assembly.. or longer! That's the key tradeoff. > >>And if Matthew Dillon was think of doing a macro assembler... Could he >>use a library for the instruction decoding? I think string gadget sould >>be able to do calculation. > > *what* are you talking about? > > -Matt I think it is a kind of expression evaluator (like the EVAL function on my old BBC). I've written such a thing in C in about 2 evenings. How long will that take in assembler??? C is great for developing algorithmes. If your program is ready, then rewrite critical parts in assembly. I know a lot of programmer who only write in assembler: their output is very small. -Erwin van Breemen- The Orega Programming Group Holland.