Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Thanks to all for your thoughts.
And especially to David for doing a quick test for me.
I honestly cannot believe that people are still 'optimising' CPU.
Unless you call major chunks of CPU-intensive code, you are not going to find
enough savings to buy a beer.
An
and I was
running flat out with a relatively high in ready.
--- On Tue, 9/9/08, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: question for C experts - strcpy vs memcpy (fwd)
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 12:57 AM
Thanks to all
Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 8:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: question for C experts - strcpy vs memcpy (fwd)
Thanks to all for your thoughts.
And especially to David
But Ted, there *are* good reasons to still optimize CPU
I did say:
Unless you call major chunks of CPU-intensive code, you are not going
to find enough savings to buy a beer.
You said the same thing.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: question for C experts - strcpy vs memcpy (fwd)
But Ted, there *are* good reasons to still optimize CPU
I did say:
Unless you call major chunks of CPU-intensive code, you are not
going to find enough savings to buy a beer.
You said the same thing
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Mark Post wrote:
On 9/8/2008 at 2:25 PM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], John McKown
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-snip-
Why don't I just look at the generated code? Because I don't
have a C compiler for z/OS. I'm writing my code on Linux using GCC.
You can see the
Thanks to all for your thoughts. And especially to David for doing a quick
test for me.
I apologize if I was too off-topic. This relates, vaguely, to my JCL
parser. I was wondering whether to use memcpy or strcpy for LITERALS.
For indeterminate length strings I do use strncpy and snprintf so
Thanks to all for your thoughts.
And especially to David for doing a quick test for me.
I honestly cannot believe that people are still 'optimising' CPU.
Unless you call major chunks of CPU-intensive code, you are not going to find
enough savings to buy a beer.
I/O, even with today's faster
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Ted MacNEIL wrote:
Thanks to all for your thoughts.
And especially to David for doing a quick test for me.
I honestly cannot believe that people are still 'optimising' CPU.
Why not? I really cannot believe that a person's attitude would be who
cares?. If I can do
- strcpy vs memcpy (fwd)
Thanks to all for your thoughts.
And especially to David for doing a quick test for me.
I honestly cannot believe that people are still 'optimising' CPU.
Unless you call major chunks of CPU-intensive code, you are not going to
find enough savings to buy a beer.
I/O
10 matches
Mail list logo
