Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucrmath!musial!rhyde
From: rhyde@musial.ucr.edu (randy hyde)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: HLLs vs. Assembly
Message-ID: <13839@ucrmath.ucr.edu>
Date: 24 Apr 91 16:36:23 GMT
References: <1029@stewart.UUCP> <13345@ucrmath.ucr.edu> <1040@stewart.UUCP> <13516@ucrmath.ucr.edu> <1055@stewart.UUCP>
Sender: news@ucrmath.ucr.edu
Reply-To: rhyde@musial.ucr.edu (randy hyde)
Lines: 20

>> It went up by a factor of 4-5...Still written in C...So go figure...

There's nothing to figure, better programming is better programming regardless
of the language.  If you've got a better algorithm, it's going to run faster
(assuming that's what's better about the algorithm).  As my CRC posts prove,
it's quite possible to have a C program run faster than an assembly program
if the C program uses a better algorithm.  Given the same algorithm, though,
the assembly code will always run faster still (generally by 50% to 1000%).
Would you like X to run 8-10 times faster rather than 4-5?  Write it in
assembly.
Personally, I feel X is too unstable to do this just yet (still too many new
versions in the works), buit ultimately, a X-terminal vendor may want to recode
X in assembly so (1) That vendor has a performance advantage over
competitors, or
(2) that vendor can use slower parts (i.e., cheaper) to acheive the same
performance as competitors for less money.

If you're happy with the performance as it is (I suspect you're not, you *did*
upgrade to the faster version, right?), stick with it.  But would you turn down
code which runs 2x faster?