This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: demand_empty_rest_of_line and ignore_rest_of_line


Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:

> Frankly, (as someone who has to stare at GCC's assembly output all the
> damn time), I do not think 1% speedup is worth the *severe*
> degradation in readability that this would impose.  I would much
> rather put effort into making GAS's parser be faster in
> input-scrubbing mode.

I've certainly looked at plenty of assembler code, and I personally
don't think there is any degradation in readability whatsoever.  The
only change of any significance is that comments are not permitted.
It's not difficult to generate comments only when some option is
used--such as -fverbose-asm.

Can you give some examples of how pre-scrubbed code is harder to read?

I put a lot of time into speeding up input scrubbing a few years back,
and got some good results, which are now part of gas.  But no matter
what we do it's going to be faster to process code if we don't have to
skip spaces and comments.

Ian


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]