home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: solon.com!not-for-mail
- From: VArase@varase.it.luc.edu (Verne Arase)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c.moderated,hp.unix,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.hp.hpux
- Subject: Re: C coding problem
- Date: 8 Apr 1996 11:10:46 -0500
- Organization: LUMC
- Sender: clc@solutions.solon.com
- Approved: clc@solutions.solon.com
- Message-ID: <4kbdq6$ec2@solutions.solon.com>
- References: <4j06na$808@solutions.solon.com> <4jttan$3gf@solutions.solon.com> <4jv6st$crf@solutions.solon.com> <4k1qh3$5hn@solutions.solon.com> <4k5vrk$a2d@solutions.solon.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: solutions.solon.com
-
- In article <4k5vrk$a2d@solutions.solon.com>,
- schwarz@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Konrad Schwarz) wrote:
-
- >|> In such and environment,
- >|> *q++ = *p++;
- >|> loses badly to
- >|> q[i] = p[i], ++i;
- >|> if the hardware indexing works in terms of the objects being
- >|> referenced.
- >
- >Note that indexed addressing often works only for small
- >powers of two, e.g., x86 family.
-
- Why only small powers of two? You mean if the size of each element is a
- small power of two (so you can use shift rather than multiply)?
-
- AFAIK, indexed addressing works with just about all CISC computers, from
- the x86 and 68K line through S/360/370/390.
-
- Don't recall about DEC VAXen, but when I last looked at the instruction set
- I remember whistling "... and a partridge in a pear tree ..."
-
- ---
- The above are my own opinions, and not those of my employer.
-