Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!bloom-beacon!adam.pika.mit.edu!scs
From: scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: BIT Counting: C programming problem
Message-ID: <8767@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 15 Jan 89 00:50:37 GMT
References: <225@tityus.UUCP> <others too numerous to count>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit)
Distribution: na
Lines: 23

Pathetically flogging his long-dead equine quadruped, the style
advocate tonelessly repeats his sad lament:

	"First code it in the obvious way, deferring any attempt
	at optimization until profiling demonstrates that the
	bit-counting code contributes significantly to
	unacceptable run time."

Judging from the attention these "cute problems" continually
receive here (last month it was finding the high-order bit), one
would have to conclude that virtually every C program requires
such arcane bit manipulations, and that infants would perish,
space shuttles crash, and empires topple if the answer were not
obtained in the absolute minimal, micro-optimized time.

The suggestions for 64K lookup tables had implied smiley faces, right?
Please?

(Smiley face here, too; I know we're all just having good, clean,
computer nurd fun.)

                                            Steve Summit
                                            scs@adam.pika.mit.edu