Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bbn!apple!well!ewhac
From: ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: C help
Message-ID: <11238@well.UUCP>
Date: 5 Apr 89 09:05:50 GMT
References: <19888@srcsip.UUCP>
Reply-To: ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab)
Organization: Hole Earth 'Lectronic Loss (or words to that effect)
Lines: 38
Quote: "I plan to live forever -- or die trying."  -- Vila

In article <19888@srcsip.UUCP> carpent@coltrane.SRC.Honeywell.COM (Todd Carpenter) writes:
>void moo(state,new_state) 
>  ushort state[NUM_STATES], new_state[NUM_STATES];
>{
>  ushort i;
>
>  for (i = 0; i != NUM_STATES; i++)
>    new_state[i] = state[i];
>
>  ...
>}
>
>Anyone have any significantly faster ideas?  Blitter?  Number of states may be
>up to 256.
>
	CopyMem (new_state, state, (LONG) NUM_STATES * sizeof (ushort));

	Is there any particular reason why you have to undo the whole table?
If you were to re-write the algorithm to undo only those elements that
needed undoing, you'd save a lot of time.

>However, if I remember right, all divides in C are, by definition, done in
>double floating point.  [ ... ]

	A zillion other people are going to say this, too, and will probably
quote K&R or DpANS chapter and verse.

	If all the operands in an expression are integers, then the
evaluation of the expression is done using integer arithmetic.  If you stick
any floats or doubles in there, then floating point arithmetic will be used
(though not necessarily throughout the expression (watch me get toasted for
that one)).

_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape	INET: well!ewhac@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
 \_ -_		Recumbent Bikes:	UUCP: pacbell > !{well,unicom}!ewhac
O----^o	      The Only Way To Fly.	      hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack")
"Work FOR?  I don't work FOR anybody!  I'm just having fun."  -- The Doctor