Author: daniel (p50863C42.dip.t-dialin.net)
Date: 01-24-2002 00:53
Hi,
from all your postings concerning this topic, it seems to me that you didn't have the slightest idea of how an _modern_ OS works ,or how to program _big_ Programms like an OS.
>I purely said that if the standard TOS/GEM was re-written in assembly instead of C, and that the patches that should have been done, were written into the newer code, then it would run faster.
Face the truth, ASM could be faster as C code, but you won't recon ANY speed up.
The other thing is that you CAN NOT mainatin/ update ASM-code so good as (well writen) C code.
Most of these vectors will not be re-routed as the correct code would already be in place, and there would be no need to route to anything to fix it.
Ermmm.. as far as I know, the VECTORS already exist, that is: the TOS uses those VECTORS and there is no performance increase if these VECTORS point to another memorylocation, except that the RAM is lot faster, if it is fast-RAM.
>With NVDI, most of the routines ARE exactly the same, but written in assembly instead of C, and look how much faster NVDI makes the whole system... because the CPU draws its gfx so much faster, it gets on with its other stuff a whole lot quicker, surely you can see that?
Yeah, here youare right ,BUT for example there exits one really good/ fast algorithem for drawing a line, so if you code it in ASM you WILL NEVER change it; BUT a Memory-management or a process-sheduler are a bit more complex than a line-algo, if you make a mistake there the OS becomes unstable and you probably NEVER find this Error, cause the code is not the easy to understand.
And just remeber, there are some parts in MiNT that are written in ASM, you really need it if you do interupts or tricky bitshifting.
And just become aware of the fact, that C compilers generate erally good code, the most things you CAN NOT optimize by handwritten ASM cause the compiler choosed the BEST possibility.
salut,
daniel
|
