Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!ji.Berkeley.EDU!shebanow
From: shebanow@ji.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: String Processing Instruction
Message-ID: <18036@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Fri, 27-Mar-87 12:19:36 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.18036
Posted: Fri Mar 27 12:19:36 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Mar-87 14:21:03 EST
References: <15292@amdcad.UUCP> <978@ames.UUCP> <15694@sun.uucp>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: shebanow@ji.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Mike Shebanow)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 10
Keywords: instruction set architectures, Am29000, printf
Xref: utgpu comp.arch:678 comp.lang.c:1352
Summary: Isn't printf the worst library offender?

Every time I trace a program which uses stdio to any great degree, I find
printf to be the worst offender (with regard to time consumed). In fact,
I have seen programs which spend 30% of their time in printf (actually
_doprnt). In the code I have optimized, I usually try to eliminate the
use of printf (which can make the code rather opaque). This does result
in 10-20% improvements in speed. The most obvious use of new string
processing instructions would be to improve the performance of printf.
Has anyone done this?

Mike Shebanow