[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: none
From: |
David Philippi |
Subject: |
Re: none |
Date: |
Thu, 15 Aug 2002 17:52:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.4.1 |
On Thursday 15 August 2002 13:20, Ingo Ruhnke wrote:
> Just make sure that the compiler actually makes on optimizations out
> of that and that you don't optimize for nothing. I just doubt that the
> compiler will handle 'const float&' any different from 'float', no, I
> haven't looked at the compiler output...
Why shouldn't I optimize for nothing? It's my time, noone has to pay for it.
I don't know wheter any given compiler will optimize through this, I just
know that none would if I hadn't made the change.
In the end it's more a matter of taste - I like to optimize code and have fun
doing it. I don't even ask you to do the same unless you want to.
Bye David
- Re: none, Ingo Ruhnke, 2002/08/14
- Re: none, David Philippi, 2002/08/15
- Re: none, Ingo Ruhnke, 2002/08/15
- Re: none,
David Philippi <=
- Re: none, David Philippi, 2002/08/15