Index
> Main > Optimization |
| Author |
|
|
revolution 17 Apr 2011, 11:48
farresito wrote: Is it possible to specify a grade of optimization in FASM ...? There are a few macros around here that can "improve" encoding for things like LEA and TEST. farresito wrote: I found in a post that FASM 2 (if done) would be probably slower than the current one. SLOWER means assembling, right? |
|||
17 Apr 2011, 11:48 |
|
|
ouadji 17 Apr 2011, 15:39
My god, the day Fasm changes my code... I shudder to think!, i throw it in the bin.  _________________ I am not young enough to know everything (Oscar Wilde)-  |
|||
|
17 Apr 2011, 15:39 |
|
|
neville 17 Apr 2011, 20:18
revolution wrote: Your code is still your code, fasm won't mess with the output. PS. Did I really meet you a couple of weeks ago, or was it just your hologram  _________________ FAMOS - the first memory operating system |
|||
|
17 Apr 2011, 20:18 |
|
|
revolution 17 Apr 2011, 23:56
neville wrote: Although let's not forget that assemblers often have encoding options that can produce shorter or longer code, and that code consequently may run faster or slower, albeit slightly. There is not a 100% 1:1 correspondence between assembly language mnemonics and machine code. neville wrote: PS. Did I really meet you a couple of weeks ago, or was it just your hologram  |
|||
|
17 Apr 2011, 23:56 |
|
|
farresito 18 Apr 2011, 15:12
Thanks guys for your anwsers.
Quote: fasm2 may change that In FASM 2, the performance will be better? So code might be better optimized? Thanks! |
|||
|
18 Apr 2011, 15:12 |
|
|
revolution 18 Apr 2011, 15:20
farresito wrote: In FASM 2, the performance will be better? So code might be better optimized! Also, be careful when you simply say optimisation. There is no simple metric that can cover it. In the general case there is no standard workstation/PC/platform that can be used as a benchmark to give consistent comparative measurements. Everyone has a different idea about what it optimised, and everyone has a different way to test for it. |
|||
|
18 Apr 2011, 15:20 |
|
|
farresito 21 Apr 2011, 13:17
FASM is multipassing processor, right? So it (almost) always tries to make the jumps as short as possible? Thats what I mean for optimization. To try to make the fastest code possible reducing the jumps.
Well, thanks another time. I dont want to be tiring but I dont know why I always have dubts with which assembler to use, although most of the people around the forums recommend FASM. Im a little bit concerned in the code optimisation. |
|||
|
21 Apr 2011, 13:17 |
|
|
revolution 21 Apr 2011, 13:22
farresito wrote: FASM is multipassing processor, right? So it (almost) always tries to make the jumps as short as possible? Thats what I mean for optimization. To try to make the fastest code possible reducing the jumps. But your query seems to be about code size reduction, which you are calling optimisation[1]. If this is correct then, yes, fasm presently does optimise your code size. fasm2 will also most probably optimise the code just the same, but with some extra features to do a few more fancy things. The code functionality will still be the same though. [1] Note that jump size reduction is not a proxy for fast code. It is not as simple as that. Try not to confuse small code size with fast execution, they are not the same thing. |
|||
|
21 Apr 2011, 13:22 |
|
|
farresito 22 Apr 2011, 09:51
Thanks revolution.
Ok, it was a little bit of all. I thought that making jumps smaller would also increase code execution considerably, so It has been confusing. Now its clearer. Regards! PD: So the execution speed of the same code assembled in various assemblers would be (mostly) the same right? PDPD: Will be Fasm 2 definetely made? I red in a post that maybe Tomas would not make it. Thanks a lot for helping me. Its just awesome  |
|||
|
22 Apr 2011, 09:51 |
|
|
revolution 22 Apr 2011, 09:59
farresito wrote: PD: So the execution speed of the same code assembled in various assemblers would be (mostly) the same right? farresito wrote: PDPD: Will be Fasm 2 definetely made? I red in a post that maybe Tomas would not make it. fasm2 might, or might not, happen. Just use the existing fasm until such time as a new version arrives. |
|||
|
22 Apr 2011, 09:59 |
|
|
farresito 22 Apr 2011, 10:26
Thanks a lot revolution
I really appreciate your support. Thanks for taking your time replying my questions. Regards! |
|||
|
22 Apr 2011, 10:26 |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|