Figured I'ld forward this from Slug to Plug, since it's relevant.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Thomas S Hatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sep 21, 2007 11:42 PM
Subject: [sllug-members]: Fiber for Salt Lake and Utah Movement
To: Salt Lake Linux Users Group Discussions <[EMAIL PROTECT
Charles Curley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I like it. A few points.
>
> * It is base ten only. My solution is much more general. Need base 36?
> Recall that base 10 was not specified in the original problem. But
> your method can be adapted at the cost of:
>
> * expanding the lookup table,
Steve wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought inlining was not a guarantee,
> but only a suggestion.
You are correct, but as long as optimization isn't turned completely
off, I'd be very shocked if the compiler didn't follow the suggestion.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought inlining was not a guarantee,
but only a suggestion.
On 9/21/07, Michael L Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve wrote:
> > How much function call overhead is this incurring?
> > Would it run faster if you took the digit function and just embedded
> > it
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How much function call overhead is this incurring?
> Would it run faster if you took the digit function and just embedded
> it directly into the itoa function?
Should be 0, since he declared it to be inline. The compiler could
always ignore that, though. And
Steve wrote:
> How much function call overhead is this incurring?
> Would it run faster if you took the digit function and just embedded
> it directly into the itoa function?
Practically nothing, since it's declared as "inline." The compiler *is*
embedding it directly in the itoa function.
>
How much function call overhead is this incurring?
Would it run faster if you took the digit function and just embedded
it directly into the itoa function?
On 9/21/07, Charles Curley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 08:37:11PM -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> > Charles Curley <[EMA
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 08:37:11PM -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> Charles Curley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Have we beaten this thing into the ground yet?
>
> Not quite yet. Try this one:
I like it. A few points.
* It is base ten only. My solution is much more general. Need base 36?
Re
For anyone interested I have the site up and operational, and will be
adding content shortly.
The URL is http://www.dreamrpgonline.com/
Sincerely,
Steve
On 9/21/07, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok it looks like Drupal is the natural choice for this.
>
> As to the other questions.
>
> The si
Charles Curley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Have we beaten this thing into the ground yet?
Not quite yet. Try this one:
void itoa(int n, char s[]) {
int i, sign;
sign = n;
i = 0;
do {
s[i++] = "0123456789"[abs(n % 10)];
} while ( n /= 10 );
if (sign < 0)
s[i++] = '-';
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 04:11:44PM -0600, Dave Smith wrote:
> Charles Curley wrote:
> >Ah, good. Did you finally get around to looking at the solution I
> >posted to this thread two days ago?
> >
>
> It also crashes at random points (sometimes after 6700 invocations,
> sometimes after 5001, som
Charles Curley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Picky, picky.
>
> OK, 0 is a likely value in an embedded context, so I added code for
> that. I have two return statements, which would save a branch
> instruction on some compilers, but maybe not on others.
>
> I didn't handle INT_MIN because it's a b
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 04:11:44PM -0600, Dave Smith wrote:
> Charles Curley wrote:
> >Ah, good. Did you finally get around to looking at the solution I
> >posted to this thread two days ago?
> >
>
> Yup, it's pretty nice with only a few warts. It doesn't work for zero or
> INT_MIN.
Picky, pic
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So does this presnet a real world bug, or would the user just perform
> some bounds checking prior to handing it off to the function?
Well, you could specify that your function isn't required to work on
the smallest int value representable in your int, but that
Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> My version skips the strcat() at the end of itoa() in favor of just
> returning a char* that points at where my itoa() put the string in the
> specified buffer. The caller can then know where to find the int. It
> saves a bit of time, but at the slight cos
So does this presnet a real world bug, or would the user just perform
some bounds checking prior to handing it off to the function?
Something like...
if(myval < 0 && abs(myval) == myval)
or maybe
if(myval == INT_MIN)
On 9/21/07, Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Levi Pearson wrote:
> > Th
Levi Pearson wrote:
The answer lies in 2's complement binary representation of integers.
There aren't the same number of integers to the left and to the right
of 0; there's one more to the left. So, the absolute value of the
smallest representable integer isn't representable in the same number
o
Charles Curley wrote:
Ah, good. Did you finally get around to looking at the solution I
posted to this thread two days ago?
Yup, it's pretty nice with only a few warts. It doesn't work for zero or
INT_MIN. It also crashes at random points (sometimes after 6700
invocations, sometimes after
On 9/21/07, Levi Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The answer lies in 2's complement binary representation of integers.
> There aren't the same number of integers to the left and to the right
> of 0; there's one more to the left. So, the absolute value of the
> smallest representable integer is
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 02:59:05PM -0600, Dave Smith wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>
> Anyway, I revised my implementation today to not *need* a log10 function
> by writing the ascii value into the *end* of the buffer, right-to-left,
> least-significant to most-significant, and then it returns a pointe
Ok it looks like Drupal is the natural choice for this.
As to the other questions.
The site should hopefully become a full fledged online community.
At the present time I'm only looking at a single site.
This is not already a business, at the moment there are no plans for a
business other than m
Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did, however, find another special case (in addition to zero), and
> that is INT_MIN. If you can figure out why INT_MIN is a special case,
> you get bonus Plug Karma points. The answer lies in the result of the
> following C expression:
>
>abs( INT_MI
/me drools
I have GOT to see this code Dave!
On 9/21/07, Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve wrote:
> > Since the sprintf function is slowing down on the log10 due to
> > floating point arithmetic, I wonder if a further optimization could be
> > made by rewriting the log10 function in as
Steve wrote:
Since the sprintf function is slowing down on the log10 due to
floating point arithmetic, I wonder if a further optimization could be
made by rewriting the log10 function in assembler to take advantage of
the floating point registers?
I found that writing an integer-based log10
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since the sprintf function is slowing down on the log10 due to
> floating point arithmetic, I wonder if a further optimization could be
> made by rewriting the log10 function in assembler to take advantage of
> the floating point registers?
> My ASM is way to rus
Since the sprintf function is slowing down on the log10 due to
floating point arithmetic, I wonder if a further optimization could be
made by rewriting the log10 function in assembler to take advantage of
the floating point registers?
My ASM is way to rusty to attempt this right now but I think I'l
26 matches
Mail list logo
