Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.programmer:2610 comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:1910 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!tandem!zorch!xanthian From: xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Good programmers and assembly language (very long) Message-ID: <1991Apr12.123455.24220@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Date: 12 Apr 91 12:34:55 GMT References: <7214@harrier.ukc.ac.uk> <2220@pdxgate.UUCP> <7227@harrier.ukc.ac.uk> Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix Lines: 25 Not about to wade through Mike Rizzo's whole 435 article again at 1200 baud to quote four lines, but the claim was made in an inclusion that "the quicksort programmer would have less need than an assembly games writer to make his program faster". This shows an incredible lack of knowledge of programming as a field of endeavor. Some of the most valuable products, with the most invested man-years, and at the highest prices (and profits) for sale in the business data processing market place are sort packages, and they sell based entirely on speed. This is easy to confirm; just go pick up the latest copy of ComputerWorld, look for the full page sort package ads, and note the prominent position and size of the histograms comparing speed against the competitors' products. Why, you may ask, is speed so important in this field? Because 75% of _all_ cpu cycles in business data processing are spent doing sorts. Shave off 1/15th of the time needed to run the sort, and you've added 1/5th to the time available to do the rest of the job, and made the hardware 1/5th more productive. Write a faster sort and the world will pave your pathway with cold, hard cash. Kent, the man from xanth.