home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: halon.vggas.com!news
- From: JYoungman@vggas.com (James Youngman)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.lang.c
- Subject: Re: Two things, RedHat + Linux efficiency
- Date: 13 Mar 1996 10:41:41 GMT
- Organization: VG Gas Analysis Systems
- Message-ID: <4i68p5$hlc@halon.vggas.com>
- References: <4lFXuqq00aw=M=iUNp@andrew.cmu.edu> <4i5lev$fd3@agate.berkeley.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 132.147.163.4
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
- X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7
-
- In article <4i5lev$fd3@agate.berkeley.edu>, nickkral@america.CS.Berkeley.EDU
- says...
- >
- >In article <4lFXuqq00aw=M=iUNp@andrew.cmu.edu>,
- >Nicholas P Konidaris <npk+@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
- >>for (cnt = 0; cnt < 50000; cnt++)
- >> x = x + 1
- >Note 2: If you were to run "gcc -O2 blah...", that should reduce the
- >loop to:
- >
- > cnt = 50000;
- > x = 50000;
-
- This turns out not to be the case in the example of GCC since it specifically
- recogniises this construct as a timing loop and therefore doesn't optimise
- it away. Neat, eh?
-
- James Youngman
-
-