[Home]
[Edit this page]
[Recent Changes]
[Special Pages]
[Help]
talk:x86ASMFAQ_Optimize
This page is to discuss "x86ASMFAQ_Optimize". You can ask questions or make comments.
What is a talkpage?
An expert human will most often beat any compiler by several orders.
This is not by deductive skills but by his coder responsabilities. One crucial thing ppl too often forget is that when one is accustommed to low level and assembly he can refine or change the input data structures or overall frame. So it is this retroactive step that no compiler will ever be allowed to do. For instance without the inner loop X-Mode trick of the renderer (vertical span), Doom (real time 3D) would have seemed an impossible target for any standard C/C++ programmer on a 486. I could give much more spearhead examples but it would be more complex and less known to the public.
I add that there is a mythology : "rely on the compiler specially nowadays as the machines are so powerful and complex". It's still very false if you target competition beating software. And my own work will prove it soon. To me anyone not knowing assembly and how compilers generate code can not be called a real coder - in the game industry at least.
Remember: Knowledge is Power. There is no worse mistake than thinking that someday machines will free us from the burden of thinking. Artificial intelligence will never be intelligent, for the creator is always above his creation.
It is a programmers funeral when he starts thinking that "compiler knows better".
Along with general submission on x86 optimizing, wait for Win32 optimizing issues described there. Developing in pure assembly under Win32 has somewhat different philosophy, so there are some good hints. I'll be back in a couple of days, when info will be ready...
[Edit this page] [Page history] [What links here] [Printer Friendly]
talk:x86ASMFAQ_Optimize
This page is to discuss "x86ASMFAQ_Optimize". You can ask questions or make comments.
What is a talkpage?
An expert human will most often beat any compiler by several orders.
This is not by deductive skills but by his coder responsabilities. One crucial thing ppl too often forget is that when one is accustommed to low level and assembly he can refine or change the input data structures or overall frame. So it is this retroactive step that no compiler will ever be allowed to do. For instance without the inner loop X-Mode trick of the renderer (vertical span), Doom (real time 3D) would have seemed an impossible target for any standard C/C++ programmer on a 486. I could give much more spearhead examples but it would be more complex and less known to the public.
I add that there is a mythology : "rely on the compiler specially nowadays as the machines are so powerful and complex". It's still very false if you target competition beating software. And my own work will prove it soon. To me anyone not knowing assembly and how compilers generate code can not be called a real coder - in the game industry at least.
=================================
I agree here completely.Remember: Knowledge is Power. There is no worse mistake than thinking that someday machines will free us from the burden of thinking. Artificial intelligence will never be intelligent, for the creator is always above his creation.
It is a programmers funeral when he starts thinking that "compiler knows better".
Along with general submission on x86 optimizing, wait for Win32 optimizing issues described there. Developing in pure assembly under Win32 has somewhat different philosophy, so there are some good hints. I'll be back in a couple of days, when info will be ready...
[Edit this page] [Page history] [What links here] [Printer Friendly]
