From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bcdac28207102750 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: tmoran@bix.com (Tom Moran) Subject: Re: Ada95 speed Date: 1999/05/20 Message-ID: <3744260e.182416@news.pacbell.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 480150712 References: <3740C535.7C6200A8@gte.net> X-Complaints-To: abuse@pacbell.net X-Trace: typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net 927213392 206.170.2.101 (Thu, 20 May 1999 08:16:32 PDT) Organization: SBC Internet Services NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 08:16:32 PDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-05-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >screen with eight bit color took six seconds in C on a MacIIfx. >The following computations (leaving out all the with statements that you >need for the Mac) take ten seconds on an iMac 266 MHertz Mac OS 8.5.1 How fast does the original C code run on the iMac? That would be the only fair comparison of hardware. A cleverly done fractal program will usually run *much* faster than the first, simplest, implemenation of the algorithm. If your app's speed is bottlenecked by one small section of code it's always a good idea to see if asm for that little bit would make a worthwhile difference.