Hehe and I almost thought about changing to (x & 0x3f) instead of (x % 64)
but decided to skip that one =)
The more you know!
2013/7/15 Andreas Krennmair <ak_AT_synflood.at>
> * sin <sin_AT_2f30.org> [2013-07-15 12:20]:
>
> I'd break this patch into multiple patches. The change from *= 8 to <<= 3
>> doesn't make sense. Maybe it did in the 80s but not anymore.
>>
>
> Just for the sake of completeness: there's a rather interesting
> presentation from a few years ago that explains in detail how clever
> compilers really are with their optimizations: http://www.fefe.de/source-*
> *code-optimization.pdf <http://www.fefe.de/source-code-optimization.pdf>
>
> Andreas
>
>
Received on Mon Jul 15 2013 - 16:51:29 CEST