Am 25.01.2016 12:36 schrieb "Graeme Geldenhuys" < mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk>: > > On 2016-01-20 23:11, Sven Barth wrote: > > You cam check this by compiling with -al and comparing the assembler code. > > It seems using Sets produce slightly smaller assembler code (2 > instructions less) for the example code I posted. Attached is a comparison. > > I guess the other benefit is that using Sets is more "pascal like" and > probably easier for more developers to understand.
In theory the compiler could optimize the non-set code... I don't know whether the compiler is currently indeed capable of doing so though. Did you test with different optimization settings? Anyway I agree that sets are easier to read ;) Regards Sven
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
