Hello all,
My name is Andrew Louis. I am a student pursuing an MS in computer
science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. For some
time now, I have been looking to get involved in a free software
project. I began looking through the "Contributors Wanted" listings on
savannah and
>> + * Unlike "if (src & smask) dst |= dmask", which is also two instructions
> This is confusing because the BST + BLD code below is not a replacement
> for what the C code is indicating. For example the C code never clears
> the bit as opposed to BLD.
>> + * and two cycles, this overwrites the
George Spelvin schrieb:
As part of poking around vfprintf.c, I came across this low-hanging fruit.
I'm waiting to test all of my printf changes together, but I thought
I'd throw it out for comment early. I presume this sort of thing is okay?
Basically, by reversing the sense of the FL_FLTUPP f
> The reworked version comes up with 110 bytes (still asserting MUL).
Nicely done.
> perf-metering with avrtest reveals a run time from ~3100 up to < 4800
> ticks; high as expected.
While mine is 3161 cycles worst case (64 ones), or 4045 if !MUL.
So yours is actually not too unreasonable *if*
On 06.12.2016 23:59, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
As George Spelvin wrote:
Perhaps the two different reduction-mod-5 schemes should depend on
OPTIMIZE_SPEED?
Doesn't really matter much. Since the library is pre-compiled, you
cannot map it to the user's -Ox compiler option anyway.
As Johann already e
On 08.12.2016 00:34, George Spelvin wrote:
Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
The algo is rather slow because it always iterates over all
digits, i.e. it won't run faster for small numbers.
Have fun!
Code size is ~140 bytes.
Well, it's bigger (140 > 124), slower, and doesn't handle sizes *other*
than
