On Nov 21, 2007 3:36 PM, Petr Baudis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 09:16:48PM +0100, Raymond Wold wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 14:11 -0500, Don Dailey wrote: > > > Experience in a language is a factor, but nobody refutes that properly > > > coded C is fastest (next to properly code assembly) and if performance > > > is your goal, then anything else accepts some compromise. That > > > compromise may work well for a particular individual and may even > > > produce a stronger program for them, but it's still a handicap. > > > > Do you have anything to back this up? I was under the impression that > > most decent assembly programmers agreed that they can't compete with the > > best C compilers. Assembly is for when you *need* to be in touch with > > the very lowest level, which in most cases you don't, because lots and > > lots of other assembly programmers have been there before you and > > distilled their knowledge into really really smart compilers that know > > more, and can try out more, than you ever could in a lifetime. > > I guess that you could say the original statement holds but humans > generally can't properly code assembly anymore. ;-) >
What's to say that a computer program can't code assembly better than any human possibly could? There are a ton of tasks that computers do thousands of times better than humans. I think it makes perfect sense that code written in C can execute faster than human-written assembly code. Colin _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
