Pavel,
>My 2 cents here is: sometimes bigger and more complicated code runs a >whole lot faster than simple one if the speed is a real concern of >course... Indeed you're right in the general case. In fact it wasn't at all what I really meant. My problem currently is to have applications run, not "fast" but "as soon as possible", which I agree isn't the same thing. So I try to code the very least I can and in the most easy to maintain way. If ever I have spare time later and if I'm still able to hit a keyboard, then I'll consider putting sthetoscopes in the code to optimize it. Even this isn't always easy. For instance I'm looking desesperately for the correct MinGW GCC syntax to compile a (simple C) SQLite extension as .dll, separately from the core sqlite3.dll. I've spent an undecent time trying zillions of options via command line or using Code::Blocks, but the compiled .dll crash on the SQLITE_EXTENSION_INIT2(pApi) macro (access violation). It _must_ be something dumb like calling convention or the like, but I've wasted more time with this idiotic detail than I would ever gain in peephole optimizations of my code. For now, I use tinyCC with success, but I'm afraid the code reliability could be inferior to what gcc would produce. Also having Code::Blocks working with a debugger (any one) would greatly help! If there is a good soul here with the needed information, you can save my day! When you leave the dev area for many years and come back are in a hurry to produce working bits you need, you find things have evolved against you. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list [email protected] http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
