Hello FPC,
Based in the optimizations to CompareByte and FillChar, I get a
suspect about record assignment when records are not very big, so
write some test code to verify it, and yes, I think code generator
should be changed in some way to get advantage in case of "small"
records < 96 bytes.
Thi
Hello FPC,
I forget to say that my machine test is a Intel Q9300 4Core, running
WinXP SP3 32 bits.
--
Best regards,
José
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Is there e.g. a page on the wiki with links to relevant ABI documents
etc. for supported CPUs?
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-devel maillist
Am 03.06.2011 03:06, schrieb Michalis Kamburelis:
> Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>> Am 01.06.2011 22:07, schrieb Michalis Kamburelis:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In my tests, FPC 2.4.4 has much slower CompareMem than FPC 2.4.2, at
>>> least for some cases:
>>
>> I've commited an improved version in r17642
>
> That'
Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>
> I improved CompareDWord as well, for your application it should be even
> better.
>
Ha, I hesitated earlier to mention that CompareWord and CompareDWord are
~4 times slower than equivalent (on the same number of bytes)
CompareMem/CompareByte calls :) Cool, times with l
