From: degger@xxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:08:01 +0100 (CET)
--- paint-funcs.c.orig Thu Nov 29 14:17:47 2001
+++ paint-funcs.c Tue Dec 4 21:53:49 2001
@@ -343,7 +343,8 @@
gdouble sigma2;
gdouble l;
gint temp;
- gint i, n;
+ guint i;
+ gint n;
sigma2 = 2 * sigma * sigma;
l = sqrt (-sigma2 * log (1.0 / 255.0));
will lead to that difference in PPC assembly:
That's nice. Will that single removed instruction even be noticeable
when compared to the square root and the log 2 lines down?
>> Bad luck, not from me.
> that, I call ignorance.
That I'd call lack of time and interest.
You're the one trying to prove that it makes a significant
difference. It's your responsibility to do the necessary
benchmarking.
> I'd say it's up to you at this point to proove your arguments. I've
> done my homework and benchmarked the use of unsigned vs. signed.
Don't even try to catch a difference using a synthetic microbenchmark;
do it on real code and you will see that it makes a difference.
Fine. Prove it the old fashioned way -- by benchmarking it.
--
Robert Krawitz <rlk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/
Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Project lead for Gimp Print/stp -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net
"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
