Prev: Aerodynamics for Engineers, 5E Solution manual Bertin Russ Cummings is available at affordable prices. Email me at instructors.team[at]gmail.com if you need to buy this. All emails will be answered ASAP.
Next: Looking for 2nd hand electronic tools
From: Jasen Betts on 12 Jan 2010 17:53
On 2010-01-11, karthikbalaguru <karthikbalaguru79(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> There are certain editors that highlight
> the syntax/color for datatypes/variables
> or comments etc.
>
> Similarly,
> Is there a tool for C language that
> could suggest an optimized/alternate
> programming logic for the function that
> is written ?
>
> The optimized/alternate logic can be
> suggested as soon as we finish coding
> for one function or it can be suggested
> as soon as the code is compiled/parsed
> by that tool.
>
> It will be even more helpful if that tool
> also provides the cycle counts, cache
> usage, cache misses and lines of code
> also.
>
> It would be better if that tool has an
> option to enable / disable this feature
> either through compile time or some
> other configurations.
>
> Any ideas ?

you seem to be asking for a compiler that is
tightly bopund to an editor, (which seems contrary to the unix
philosophy) such compiler is likely to optimise worse than GCC.

Tweaked C code is likely to only work well on a single architecture.

optimising compilers often alter the order in which statements are
executed etc...

If you really want to optimise for a single architecture
you should probably be coding in assembler anyway.






> Thx in advans,
> Karthik Balaguru


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net ---
From: Ed Prochak on 12 Jan 2010 23:58
On Jan 12, 3:19 pm, karthikbalaguru <karthikbalagur...(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jan 13, 12:05 am, Andy <jonesa...(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 12, 11:12 am, scattered <still.scatte...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I don't see why it would be impossible. Optimizing compilers exist and
> > > by using similar techniques it should be possible to write a compiler
> > > that uses C as both the source and target language. How useful this
> > > would be is another question. The resulting code would need to be
> > > humanly readable if the tool would be of any use and the would
> > > probably place severe restrictions on the sorts of optimizations that
> > > can be done. I would be surprised if no work along these lines has
> > > been done.
>
> > The optimizations would have to be limited to that subset that can be
> > implemented at the C level.
>
> True !
>
> > That might be difficult to do, since the
> > optimization is not usually concerned with whether or not the
> > optimized version can be portrayed in C.
>
> True, but i am looking only at the
> C level optimization.
>
> > The generated C code would have to look similar (same variable names,
> > etc.) to the original to be useful.
>
> I think, in such scenarios, the tool should
> be having tremendous knowledge about
> the software/program and take care
> end to end. Maybe, the tool can generate
> report on the changes and the reason for
> the changes so the developer can use
> it for further developments or any other
> maintenance activities on that code.
>
> > And if the compiler can show you those optimizations in the form of
> > modified code, why not have it skip showing you the code and just
> > optimize it behind the scenes like it always does?
>
> Maybe, it would be better if it
> can do it before user rather than
> behind the scenes so that the user
> is aware of the kind of optimzations
> that are being done and could be
> taken care. It is also needed so that
> the developer will be able to take care
> of further developments on the same
> program/software and also for the
> maintenance activities on that
> program/software.
>
> Thx in advans,
> Karthik Balaguru

There is such a tool. It is called a code review.
From: Chris McDonald on 13 Jan 2010 00:45
Paul Keinanen <keinanen(a)sci.fi> writes:

>If the problem on average is badly trained programmers, the obvious
>solution should be improving the training of programmers.

>A tool that points out suboptimal constructs etc. might be useful in
>the training phase, but what is the point of using it in actual
>program production ?

If sufficiently sophisticated it could be used as a regression tester
for code submitted to a revision system.

This presumes, however, that it's better to have "optimal" source code
than to have readble/expressive source code.

--
Chris.
From: Lorenzo Villari on 13 Jan 2010 09:23
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:44:08 +0100
David Brown <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote:

>
> Thirdly, rather than having a compiler try to guess what algorithm
> you are trying to implement, it would be better to have more
> algorithms implemented in the libraries and preferably the language
> itself in a way that is natural for the programmer. For example, if
> the language has support for real arrays with functions such as
> sorting, the programmer can work with an array and let the compiler
> figure out the best way to implement it.
>

1) Coding a custom algorithm is not natural to the programmer?
2) What's a "real" array?

> With C, the programmer will
> either write their own bubble sort, or call qsort - with all its
> overheads.

Which overhead?

> This is why programs written in interpreted languages
> such as Python can often be faster than compiled C code for code
> working with complex data structures, hash tables, sorting, list
> manipulation, etc., Of course the C code /could/ be faster - but
> people don't write optimal algorithms in most code. With the
> libraries and language support in Python, you get very good
> algorithms for free.
>

If you can stand the formatting of python... ouch! It's the same case
of custom code vs standard code, or custom C container vs STL C++
container. One asks himself\herself why the c++ people agreed to have a
standard way of doing this and the C counterpart won't never agree...

From: Walter Banks on 13 Jan 2010 10:48


Lorenzo Villari wrote:

> One asks himself\herself why the c++ people agreed to have a
> standard way of doing this and the C counterpart won't never agree...

The C vs C++ mindsets are implementation vs application focus.
C is used in embedded systems instead of C++ because the
embedded systems developer sees their task as creating an
effective solution to their perception of a unique application.

Regards,

--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com



First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Prev: Aerodynamics for Engineers, 5E Solution manual Bertin Russ Cummings is available at affordable prices. Email me at instructors.team[at]gmail.com if you need to buy this. All emails will be answered ASAP.
Next: Looking for 2nd hand electronic tools