Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!mcnc!thorin!tlab1!leech
From: leech@tlab1.cs.unc.edu (Jonathan Leech)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Efficient coding considered harmful?
Message-ID: <4987@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Date: 1 Nov 88 17:30:55 GMT
References: <3105@hubcap.UUCP> <34112@XAIT.XEROX.COM> <1700@dataio.Data-IO.COM> <8630@smoke.ARPA> <1704@dataio.Data-IO.COM> <119@twwells.uucp> <273@tijc02.UUCP>
Sender: news@thorin.cs.unc.edu
Reply-To: leech@tlab1.UUCP (Jonathan Leech)
Organization: University Of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 15
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:

In article <273@tijc02.UUCP> pjs269@tijc02.UUCP (Paul Schmidt	     ) writes:
> Using prof(1) under UNIX I have always been suprised at where the
> time is spent for a given program.  And using this shows which
> routines need to be optimized.  Using a benchmark it was easy to see
> that only 10% of the routines were run 90% of the time.

    There are certainly counterexamples. I have occasionally profiled
the text editor I maintain. No one procedure took more than 3% of
execution time.
--
    Jon Leech (leech@cs.unc.edu)    __@/
    ``It seemed to him that in addition to being beautiful she
      brought out all that was best in him of intellect and soul.
      That is to say, she let him talk oftener and longer than
      any girl he had ever known.''
	- P. G. Wodehouse