Human vs. compiler

Index > High Level Languages > Human vs. compiler

Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

Author

Thread

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia

vid 18 Dec 2006, 00:10

there were many flamewars on this topic. Allright, let's see some compiler
output.

I will use MSVC 8.0 with -O2. Someone could provide gcc version.

original code in C

Code:

int sort(char *a, int N)
{
        int j,k;
        for (j = 2; j < N; j++) {
                for (k = 0; k < j; k++) {
                        if (a[j] < a[k]) {
                                int temp = a[k];
                                a[k] = a[j];
                                a[j] = temp;
                        }
                }
        }
}

resulting code:

Code:

sort:
        mov         eax,2       ;eax = J
        push        edi

loop1:  xor         edi,edi     ;edi = K
        test        eax,eax     
        jle         continue1

        lea         esp,[esp] ;align

loop2:  
        mov         cl,byte [edi+esi] 
        mov         dl,byte [eax+esi] 
        cmp         dl,cl 

        jge         continue2

        movsx       ecx,cl ;  
        mov         byte [edi+esi],dl 
        mov         byte [eax+esi],cl 

continue2:
        
        add         edi,1 
        cmp         edi,eax 
        jl          loop2

continue1:

        add         eax,1 
        cmp         eax,0Ah 
        jl          loop1

        pop         edi  
        ret

here are some points from me. Rest is left to you:
+ compiler aligned inner loop (most asm coders don't do this)

- compiler failed to realize that the "inserted" value is always the same. This causes 4 memory accesses per inner loop, instead of 3 (or even 2 when done smart way)

- compiler left "movsx ecx, cl" there, which is leftover of int temp = (char)a[k]; this instruction is absolutely not needed.

? compiler prefers "add reg, 1" over "inc reg". Is it better pairable or what?

18 Dec 2006, 00:10

LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4624
Location: Argentina

LocoDelAssembly 18 Dec 2006, 01:00

Quote:

? compiler prefers "add reg, 1" over "inc reg". Is it better pairable or what?

Is to break dependency chain on that shitty processor called Pentium IV. vid, do you don't remember that? It was discussed a lot of times on this forum and on theads that you have participated Confused

[edit]though, in this particular case I'm not sure if it is really needed or it's just a static optimization[/edit]

18 Dec 2006, 01:00

bubach

Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 341
Location: Trollhättan, Sweden

bubach 18 Dec 2006, 02:43

eh.. i have no idea why this is needed:

Code:

lea         esp,[esp] ;align

align the inner loop, whats that supposed to mean..? Confused

18 Dec 2006, 02:43

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia

vid 18 Dec 2006, 06:20

bubach: add the +2 extra bytes, so inner loop starts at address aligned to 16 (or 8, not sure). Something with processor's prefetching Question

Loco: hm, i don't remember seeing this one exactly, got a link?. I often miss few things, I am really not a very "focused" person. And I am also not some lowlevel optimization (pairing, timing) guy, and haven't even read optimization manuals for few years.

18 Dec 2006, 06:20

Raedwulf

Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom

Raedwulf 18 Dec 2006, 06:37

Codeplay VectorC compiler (Athlon, Vectorize, Microsoft Calling Convention, Optimisation 10, CacheSize 256kb, Auto-Inline 15:

Code:


        align 32
; File "Source Window"
; Line 1
_sort:
        push ebx
; Line 4
        femms
; Line 1
        push ebp
        push esi
        push edi
        sub esp,4
; Line 4
        mov edx,dword ptr 28[esp]
        mov ebx,dword ptr 24[esp]
        cmp edx,2
        jle short L0_RETURN

        mov esi,2
; Line 5
        align 32
__Gen1:
        test esi,esi
        jle short L2_FOR_INC

        xor ebp,ebp
; Line 6
        cmp esi,1
        jg __UnrollTestBefore3839

__UnrollLast5253:
        mov al,byte ptr 0[ebx+esi]
        mov cl,byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp]
        cmp al,cl
        jge short L2_FOR_INC

; Line 7
        mov al,byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp]
; Line 8
        mov cl,byte ptr 0[ebx+esi]
        mov byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp],cl
; Line 9
        mov byte ptr 0[ebx+esi],al
; Line 5
L2_FOR_INC:
; Line 4
        inc esi
        cmp esi,edx
        jl __Gen1

L0_RETURN:
; Line 13
        add esp,4
        pop edi
        femms
        pop esi
        pop ebp
        pop ebx
        ret

L6_FOR_INC:
; Line 6
        sub esp,4
        movq mm0,mm4
        movq mm4,mm5
        mov dword ptr [esp],edx
        mov al,byte ptr 1[ebx+ebp]
        movq mm5,mm0
; Line 5
        inc ebp
; Line 6
        movd edx,mm5
        movd mm5,dword ptr [esp]
        add esp,4
        cmp byte ptr 0[ebx+esi],al
        movd ecx,mm5
        jge short __Unrolled6263

        movq mm5,mm4
        movd mm4,edx
        mov edx,ecx
; Line 8
        mov cl,byte ptr 0[ebx+esi]
; Line 10
        sub esp,4
; Line 7
        mov al,byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp]
; Line 8
        mov byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp],cl
; Line 9
        mov byte ptr 0[ebx+esi],al
; Line 10
        mov dword ptr [esp],edx
        movd edx,mm4
        movd mm4,dword ptr [esp]
        add esp,4
        movq mm0,mm4
        movq mm4,mm5
        movq mm5,mm0
        movd ecx,mm5
__Unrolled6263:
; Line 6
        sub esp,4
        add edi,2
        mov dword ptr [esp],ecx
        movd ecx,mm4
        movd mm4,dword ptr [esp]
        add esp,4
; Line 5
        inc ebp
; Line 6
        movd eax,mm4
        cmp eax,edi
        jne short __Gen3

__UnrollLastTest4445:
        test ecx,ecx
        je L2_FOR_INC

        jmp __UnrollLast5253

        align 32
__Gen3:
        movd mm5,ecx
        mov cl,byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp]
        movd mm4,edx
        mov edx,eax
        mov al,byte ptr 0[ebx+esi]
        cmp al,cl
        jge L6_FOR_INC

; Line 7
        mov al,byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp]
; Line 8
        mov cl,byte ptr 0[ebx+esi]
        mov byte ptr 0[ebx+ebp],cl
; Line 9
        mov byte ptr 0[ebx+esi],al
; Line 10
        jmp L6_FOR_INC

__UnrollTestBefore3839:
; Line 6
        mov ecx,esi
        and ecx,1
        mov eax,esi
        and eax,-2
        je __UnrollLastTest4445

        xor edi,edi
        jmp __Gen3

__EndProcedure117:

It seems that VectorC likes unrolling a lot, no idea how good this code is though.... we need a benchmark someone! Smile

_________________
Raedwulf

Last edited by Raedwulf on 18 Dec 2006, 13:05; edited 1 time in total

18 Dec 2006, 06:37

Maverick

Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe

Maverick 18 Dec 2006, 08:49

bubach wrote:

eh.. i have no idea why this is needed:
Code:
lea         esp,[esp] ;align    
align the inner loop, whats that supposed to mean..?

It's just a two bytes long NOP that executes two times faster than two regular NOPs in sequence. Wink

_________________
Greets,
Fabio

18 Dec 2006, 08:49

crc

Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]

crc 18 Dec 2006, 11:51

GCC 4.1.0 generates this code with no options:

Code:

        .file   "a.c"
        .text
.globl sort
        .type   sort, @function
sort:
        pushl   %ebp
        movl    %esp, %ebp
        subl    $16, %esp
        movl    $2, -12(%ebp)
        jmp     .L2
.L3:
        movl    $0, -8(%ebp)
        jmp     .L4
.L5:
        movl    -12(%ebp), %eax
        addl    8(%ebp), %eax
        movzbl  (%eax), %edx
        movl    -8(%ebp), %eax
        addl    8(%ebp), %eax
        movzbl  (%eax), %eax
        cmpb    %al, %dl
        jge     .L6
        movl    -8(%ebp), %eax
        addl    8(%ebp), %eax
        movzbl  (%eax), %eax
        movsbl  %al,%eax
        movl    %eax, -4(%ebp)
        movl    -8(%ebp), %eax
        movl    %eax, %edx
        addl    8(%ebp), %edx
        movl    -12(%ebp), %eax
        addl    8(%ebp), %eax
        movzbl  (%eax), %eax
        movb    %al, (%edx)
        movl    -12(%ebp), %eax
        movl    %eax, %edx
        addl    8(%ebp), %edx
        movl    -4(%ebp), %eax
        movb    %al, (%edx)
.L6:
        addl    $1, -8(%ebp)
.L4:
        movl    -8(%ebp), %eax
        cmpl    -12(%ebp), %eax
        jl      .L5
        addl    $1, -12(%ebp)
.L2:
        movl    -12(%ebp), %eax
        cmpl    12(%ebp), %eax
        jl      .L3
        leave
        ret
        .size   sort, .-sort
        .ident  "GCC: (GNU) 4.1.0 (SUSE Linux)"
        .section        .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

With -O3, it generates:

Code:

        .file   "a.c"
        .text
        .p2align 4,,15
.globl sort
        .type   sort, @function
sort:
        pushl   %ebp
        movl    %esp, %ebp
        cmpl    $2, 12(%ebp)
        pushl   %edi
        pushl   %esi
        pushl   %ebx
        jle     .L11
        movl    $2, %edi
.L4:
        movl    8(%ebp), %eax
        xorl    %ebx, %ebx
        leal    (%edi,%eax), %esi
        .p2align 4,,7
.L5:
        movzbl  (%esi), %ecx
        movzbl  (%eax), %edx
        cmpb    %dl, %cl
        jge     .L6
        movb    %cl, (%eax)
        movb    %dl, (%esi)
.L6:
        addl    $1, %ebx
        addl    $1, %eax
        cmpl    %ebx, %edi
        jg      .L5
        addl    $1, %edi
        cmpl    %edi, 12(%ebp)
        jle     .L11
.L17:
        testl   %edi, %edi
        jg      .L4
        addl    $1, %edi
        cmpl    %edi, 12(%ebp)
        jg      .L17
.L11:
        popl    %ebx
        popl    %esi
        popl    %edi
        popl    %ebp
        .p2align 4,,1
        ret
        .size   sort, .-sort
        .ident  "GCC: (GNU) 4.1.0 (SUSE Linux)"
        .section        .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

18 Dec 2006, 11:51

Raedwulf

Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom

Raedwulf 18 Dec 2006, 12:59

GAS gives me a headache, so hopefully I've ported it correctly for GCC -O3..., correct me if im wrong, i only have basic knowledge about GAS

Code:

align 4

sort: 
        push   ebp 
        mov    ebp, esp 
        cmp    [ebp+12], 12h
        push   edi 
        push   esi 
        push   ebx 
        jle     .L11 
        mov   edi, 2h
.L4: 
        mov   eax, [ebp+8]
        xor    ebx, ebx 
        lea    esi, [edi+eax]
align 4
.L5: 
        movzx   ecx, byte [esi]
        movzx   edx, byte [eax]
        cmp    cl, dl
        jge     .L6 
        mov    [eax], cl
        mov    [esi], dl
.L6: 
        add    ebx, 1
        add    eax, 1
        cmp    edi, ebx
        jg      .L5 
        add    edi, 1
        cmp    [ebp+12], edi
        jle     .L11 
.L17: 
        test   edi, edi 
        jg      .L4 
        add    edi, 01h
        cmp   [ebp+12], edi 
        jg      .L17 
.L11: 
        pop    ebx 
        pop    esi 
        pop    edi 
        pop    ebp 
align 4 
        ret

I don't quite understand what .palign is, im just putting align 4.....

---
edited by vid - corrected you Wink

movzb a,[b] -> movzx a,byte [b]

_________________
Raedwulf

18 Dec 2006, 12:59

LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4624
Location: Argentina

LocoDelAssembly 18 Dec 2006, 13:43

vid, http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=2561 . There is some more post about this issue, most of the time revolution has something to do.

18 Dec 2006, 13:43

Raedwulf

Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom

Raedwulf 18 Dec 2006, 14:45

Ah thanks vid, movzb was MASM Smile

, that knowledge comes back to haunt me! Smile

.

Cheers.

18 Dec 2006, 14:45

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia

vid 18 Dec 2006, 16:02

loco: allright Smile

18 Dec 2006, 16:02

f0dder

Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3175
Location: Denmark

f0dder 18 Dec 2006, 23:39

A few points about the C source:

- use "void" returntype when you're not returning anything
- use "temp" of same datatype as your dataset
- prefer "unsigned" to "signed" when you don't need sign.

vid wrote:

- compiler failed to realize that the "inserted" value is always the same. This causes 4 memory accesses per inner loop, instead of 3 (or even 2 when done smart way)

What do you mean here? Keep in mind that compilers aren't 100% free to do what they want, otherwise you might've wound up with a radix sort, quicksort, whatever Smile

PS: which version is "MSVC 8.0"? The one from vs.net2005 is Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 14.00.50727.42 for 80x86, and generally /Ox or /O1 would be the flags to use (max opts or opt for size).

18 Dec 2006, 23:39

crc

Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]

crc 19 Dec 2006, 00:21

From the Small C/386 (originally for Windows NT; I ported it to Linux a few years ago. Targets NASM):

Code:

;sort(a, N)
SECTION .text
SECTION .data
SECTION .text
GLOBAL $sort
$sort:
;char *a; int N;
        PUSH EBP
        MOV EBP,ESP
;{ 
        ;  int j, k, temp; 
;  for (j = 2; j < N; j++) { 
        ADD ESP,-12
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX,2
        MOV [EBX],EAX
        _4:
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP+8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
                OR EAX,EAX
        JNE _6
        JMP _3
        _6:
        JMP _5
        _2:
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        INC EAX
        MOV [EBX],EAX
        DEC EAX
        JMP _4
        _5:
;       for (k = 0; k < j; k++) { 
                LEA EAX,[EBP-8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        XOR EAX,EAX
        MOV [EBX],EAX
        _9:
        LEA EAX,[EBP-8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
                OR EAX,EAX
        JNE _11
        JMP _8
        _11:
        JMP _10
        _7:
        LEA EAX,[EBP-8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        INC EAX
        MOV [EBX],EAX
        DEC EAX
        JMP _9
        _10:
;           if (a[j] < a[k]) { 
                LEA EAX,[EBP+12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        ADD EAX,EBX
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOVSX EAX,BYTE [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP+12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        ADD EAX,EBX
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOVSX EAX,BYTE [EBX]
        POP EBX
                OR EAX,EAX
        JNE _13
        JMP _12
        _13:
;             temp = a[k]; 
                LEA EAX,[EBP-12]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP+12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        ADD EAX,EBX
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOVSX EAX,BYTE [EBX]
        POP EBX
        MOV [EBX],EAX
;             a[k] = a[j]; 
        LEA EAX,[EBP+12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-8]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        ADD EAX,EBX
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP+12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        ADD EAX,EBX
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOVSX EAX,BYTE [EBX]
        POP EBX
        MOV [EBX],AL
;             a[j] = temp; 
        LEA EAX,[EBP+12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-4]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        ADD EAX,EBX
        PUSH EAX
        LEA EAX,[EBP-12]
        MOV EBX,EAX
        MOV EAX, [EBX]
        POP EBX
        MOV [EBX],AL
;           } 
        ;        } 
        _12:
                JMP _7
        _8:
;  } 
                JMP _2
        _3:
;}
        MOV ESP,EBP
        POP EBP
        RET
;
END

19 Dec 2006, 00:21

crc

Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]

crc 19 Dec 2006, 00:25

One last one from me, this is from TCC. I had to do a disassemble of the object file; sorry for the GAS syntax Sad

Code:

00000000 <sort>:
   0:   55                      push   %ebp
   1:   89 e5                   mov    %esp,%ebp
   3:   81 ec 0c 00 00 00       sub    $0xc,%esp
   9:   b8 02 00 00 00          mov    $0x2,%eax
   e:   89 45 fc                mov    %eax,0xfffffffc(%ebp)
  11:   8b 45 fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%eax
  14:   8b 4d 0c                mov    0xc(%ebp),%ecx
  17:   39 c8                   cmp    %ecx,%eax
  19:   0f 8d 90 00 00 00       jge    af <sort+0xaf>
  1f:   e9 0d 00 00 00          jmp    31 <sort+0x31>
  24:   8b 45 fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%eax
  27:   89 c1                   mov    %eax,%ecx
  29:   83 c0 01                add    $0x1,%eax
  2c:   89 45 fc                mov    %eax,0xfffffffc(%ebp)
  2f:   eb e0                   jmp    11 <sort+0x11>
  31:   b8 00 00 00 00          mov    $0x0,%eax
  36:   89 45 f8                mov    %eax,0xfffffff8(%ebp)
  39:   8b 45 f8                mov    0xfffffff8(%ebp),%eax
  3c:   8b 4d fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%ecx
  3f:   39 c8                   cmp    %ecx,%eax
  41:   0f 8d 63 00 00 00       jge    aa <sort+0xaa>
  47:   e9 0d 00 00 00          jmp    59 <sort+0x59>
  4c:   8b 45 f8                mov    0xfffffff8(%ebp),%eax
  4f:   89 c1                   mov    %eax,%ecx
  51:   83 c0 01                add    $0x1,%eax
  54:   89 45 f8                mov    %eax,0xfffffff8(%ebp)
  57:   eb e0                   jmp    39 <sort+0x39>
  59:   8b 45 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%eax
  5c:   8b 4d fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%ecx
  5f:   01 c8                   add    %ecx,%eax
  61:   8b 4d 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%ecx
  64:   8b 55 f8                mov    0xfffffff8(%ebp),%edx
  67:   01 d1                   add    %edx,%ecx
  69:   0f be 10                movsbl (%eax),%edx
  6c:   0f be 01                movsbl (%ecx),%eax
  6f:   39 c2                   cmp    %eax,%edx
  71:   0f 8d 31 00 00 00       jge    a8 <sort+0xa8>
  77:   8b 45 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%eax
  7a:   8b 4d f8                mov    0xfffffff8(%ebp),%ecx
  7d:   01 c8                   add    %ecx,%eax
  7f:   0f be 08                movsbl (%eax),%ecx
  82:   89 4d f4                mov    %ecx,0xfffffff4(%ebp)
  85:   8b 45 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%eax
  88:   8b 4d f8                mov    0xfffffff8(%ebp),%ecx
  8b:   01 c8                   add    %ecx,%eax
  8d:   8b 4d 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%ecx
  90:   8b 55 fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%edx
  93:   01 d1                   add    %edx,%ecx
  95:   0f be 11                movsbl (%ecx),%edx
  98:   88 10                   mov    %dl,(%eax)
  9a:   8b 45 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%eax
  9d:   8b 4d fc                mov    0xfffffffc(%ebp),%ecx
  a0:   01 c8                   add    %ecx,%eax
  a2:   0f be 4d f4             movsbl 0xfffffff4(%ebp),%ecx
  a6:   88 08                   mov    %cl,(%eax)
  a8:   eb a2                   jmp    4c <sort+0x4c>
  aa:   e9 75 ff ff ff          jmp    24 <sort+0x24>
  af:   c9                      leave  
  b0:   c3                      ret

19 Dec 2006, 00:25

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia

vid 19 Dec 2006, 12:44

f0dder: that was example code from interet, linked by wikipedia. I consider it "standard way C coders use", eg. declaring "temp" as "int" instead of char etc.

Sorry, it was MSVS 8.0, MSVC version is 14.00.50727.42.

You are right about the "moving" of value - it would be different algo.

I wanted max speed on purpose.

19 Dec 2006, 12:44

f0dder

Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3175
Location: Denmark

f0dder 19 Dec 2006, 14:04

Quote:

f0dder: that was example code from interet, linked by wikipedia. I consider it "standard way C coders use", eg. declaring "temp" as "int" instead of char etc.

It's certainly not the way I'd do it - nor most others, I'd hope. That code was written by a crummy programmer.

I'd just use std::sort anyway, until it turned out to be a bottleneck - then I'd pick a properly specialized routine, and perhaps even do an assembly version of it, if it still wasn't fast enough Smile

19 Dec 2006, 14:04

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia

vid 19 Dec 2006, 14:10

my point in this thread was just to contradict theory saying that human cannot beat compiler in lowlevel optimizations. I didn't analyze other compilers, but at least i have an proof against MSVC that it's code isn't THAT great

19 Dec 2006, 14:10

f0dder

Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3175
Location: Denmark

f0dder 19 Dec 2006, 14:20

Well, you've chosen a single & simple piece of code, written by somebody obviously isn't very good at writing C code - what did you expect? Smile

Nobodys saying that humans can't be compilers anyway, at least not anybody with a clue. What's more reasonable to say is: "for most code, it's not worth the bloody effort" Smile

19 Dec 2006, 14:20

kohlrak

Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1421
Location: Uncle Sam's Pad

kohlrak 19 Dec 2006, 21:35

The computer can't always beat the human, but the human can always beat the computer. Sadly, most humans don't beat the computer. That's my little point on this one.

19 Dec 2006, 21:35

Maverick

Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe

Maverick 20 Dec 2006, 12:25

kohlrak wrote:

The computer can't always beat the human, but the human can always beat the computer.

Sure, expecially MIPS wise. Wink

In 50 years we'll be useless, and assimilated or replaced. Very Happy

_________________
Greets,
Fabio

20 Dec 2006, 12:25

Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >

Forum Rules:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum