Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!overload!dillon
From: dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re:  Short Hello World
Message-ID: <dillon.7447@overload.Berkeley.CA.US>
Date: 8 May 91 19:56:18 GMT
References: <1804@tardis.Tymnet.COM> <1991May7.001146.1830@cinnet.com>
Organization: Not an Organization
Lines: 25

In article <1991May7.001146.1830@cinnet.com> kilian@cinnet.com (Kilian Jacob) writes:
>
>I think OldOpenLibrary() is used here on purpose. This way you can omit
>the moveq.l #0,d0 (or sub.l d0,d0 -- faster, I believe). Since no specific
>version (or higher) is need in this example using OldOpenLibrary is perfectly
>ok -- saves 2 bytes!! :-)
>
>-- /<ilian
>--
>Kilian Jacob - Cincinnati, Ohio - VOICE: (513)-489-1891
>UUCP: kilian@cinnet.com or {uceng.uc.edu, ukma!spca6, uunet!sdrc}!cinnet!kilian

    Certainly less code ... two bytes, but not faster since OldOpenLibrary()
    most likely just calls OpenLibrary() after loading a #0 into D0.

    sub.l D0,D0 is not faster than moveq.l #0,D0 on a 68000.  The two
    instructions are both one word long.

					-Matt
--

    Matthew Dillon	    dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US
    891 Regal Rd.	    uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon
    Berkeley, Ca. 94708
    USA