http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/a9lxo/assembler_to_c/
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:02:13 +0200, Walter Bright
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/a9lxo/assembler_to_c/
The link posted on reddit in broken: "You are not authorised to view this
resource. You need to login."
Broken link:
http://dobbscodetalk.com/index.php?option=c
Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:02:13 +0200, Walter Bright
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/a9lxo/assembler_to_c/
The link posted on reddit in broken: "You are not authorised to view
this resource. You need to login."
Broken link:
http://dobbscodetal
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/a9mse/walter_bright_from_assembly_to_c/
Hopefully a working link this time.
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:14:32PM +, Spacen Jasset wrote:
> The article doesn't really say why optlink?
That's not really the point though - the article is discussing "how" rather
than "why".
> Why not use another linker?
Speed is a big one, but I imagine familiarity is another - Walter ha
A nice article, thank you for writing it for us for free (I used to pay to read
similar texts).
>I had the job at the time of converting a huge (and very successful)
>electronic schematic editor, DASH, from assembler into C. In C it could then
>be recompiled for 32 bits, and even ported to othe
I have forgotten something:
Walter:
>Although I have not run any speed tests, I expect the performance of the
>non-I/O bound code to be about 30% slower. Since a linker tends to be I/O
>bound, the actual performance loss probably will be about 10%, which I can
>live with.<
To improve this situ
