Re: "Constant" performance question

Vern Hamberg wrote:

Your point is well-taken. I remember a book on VB by Gary
Cornell, where his 3 rules of optimization were 1. Don't 2. Don't
3. Don't. His basic point is the same as yours - don't do stuff
that is "cute", hence, unmaintainable. The time spent on
microseconds is better spent elsewhere. Seems it was different in
the beginning of computing, when resources were scant and slow.
But not anymore, usually.

Applicable to application programming almost exclusively, IMO. I do not want OS programmers to just assume that some bigger & better hardware exists or will come along to solve any performance concerns that arise with their code :-) Unfortunately however, it seems too often they do :-( If something is performed enough times, even the smallest numbers in duration can sum up to what is perceived as a "long wait".

Back on topic... A particular language in combination with the compiler or translator could optimize its constant data to remain in a register over many instructions referencing a datum without any re-loading into the register. Such optimization with data that is not protected from change [i.e. a variable] is not as easy in general, but especially without also ensuring & enforcing differences between debug-capable and debug-incapable code.

Regards, Chuck