Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!draken!d88-jwa
From: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: THINK code generation
Message-ID: <2935@draken.nada.kth.se>
Date: 13 Feb 90 16:41:46 GMT
Reply-To: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte)
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 25


From: pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu ("Eric Pepke")
> Now, if they would only improve the code generation...

Well, in fact THINK C has better instruction selection, but
not as good targeting (like you often see:

...
_GetNewWindow
MOVE.L +(SP), D0
MOVE.L D0, 8(FP)
MOVE.L 8(FP), (SP)-
_SetPort
...

You can't get it all... But on the other hand, THINK C generates
bit-test, set & clear instructions in almost all cases possible,
as opposed to MPW which faithfully generates AND and OR even if
they're not necessary.

Happy hacking,
					h+
-- 
   ---  Stay alert !  -  Trust no one !  -  Keep your laser handy !  ---
             h+@nada.kth.se  ==  h+@proxxi.se  ==  Jon Watte
                    longer .sig available on request