[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: inline Lua?
- From: David Given <dg@...>
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:36:39 +0000
On Sunday 26 February 2006 05:13, David Manura wrote:
> David, I did two simple tests comparing the non-collapsed with the
> collapsed generated by your script. test1 is based on sieve.lua and test2
> is based on sort.lua (on 10000 random numbers)--both with I/O removed.
> This is ming/gcc-3.4/winxp. It's an interesting idea, but "global
> optimization" didn't seem to make much of a difference as shown:
What options did you compile the combined version with? Did you try
-finline-functions on it? Because I'm very surprised that you're not seeing
anything at all.
(Apart from anything else, tweaking the Lua source so non-exported symbols
were defined static should allow the compiler to generate short-range jumps
instead of long-range, cross-module jumps. This ought to reduce code size
noticeably, as well as slightly improving perfomance.)
+- David Given --McQ-+ "I can handle myself. I've been in a fire fight.
| email@example.com | Well, I was in a fire.... Actually I was fired.
| (firstname.lastname@example.org) | From a fry cook opportunity." --- Firefly, _War
+- www.cowlark.com --+ Stories_
Description: PGP signature