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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8c8550b9f2cf7d40 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-08 22:21:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.airnews.net!cabal12.airnews.net!usenet From: "John R. Strohm" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is ther any sense in *= and matrices? Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 00:17:24 -0500 Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America Message-ID: References: Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38845 Date: 2003-06-09T00:17:24-05:00 List-Id: X-A-Notice: References line has been trimed due to 512 byte limitation Abuse-Reports-To: abuse at airmail.net to report improper postings NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library2.airnews.net NNTP-Posting-Time: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 00:20:49 -0500 (CDT) NNTP-Posting-Host: !\p8l1k-V\n`(V3 (Encoded at Airnews!) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 "Russ" <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:bebbba07.0306082027.2c50eb6b@posting.google.com... > "Bobby D. Bryant" wrote in message news:... > > On Sun, 08 Jun 2003 11:51:31 -0700, Russ wrote: > > > > > "John R. Strohm" wrote in message > > > news:... > > > > >> With all due respect, ladies and gentlemen, it has been known for a > > >> very long time that the difference in "efficiency" between A := A + B > > >> and A += B is lost in the noise floor compared to the improvements that > > >> can be gotten by improving the algorithms involved. > > > > > > Oh, really? I just did a test in C++ with 3x3 matrices. I added them > > > together 10,000,000 times using "+", then "+=". The "+=" version took > > > about 19 seconds, and the "+" version took about 55 seconds. That's just > > > shy of a factor of 3, folks. If that's your "noise floor," I can't help > > > wonder what kind of "algorithms" you are dealing with! > > > > I'm just curious why the compiler didn't generate the same code for both > > versions. > > The compiler didn't generate the code. I did. Why? If you are hand-generating assembly code for a PowerPC processor, I would bet a fair number of doughnuts that your cache utilization is shaky at best, and THAT is what is generating your factor of 3 difference.