Re: Avoid treating the stack as an array [Re: "Back & Forth" is back!]

On 15 Sep 2024 at 18:16:34 CEST, "Anton Ertl" <Anton Ertl> wrote:

I can buy a lot of CPU cycles for the cost of one day of programmer
time.

 
Some guy called Stephen Pelc (must be a different one) recentlu posted
<vbkdu0$1v8lq$1@dont-email.me>:
 
|We (MPE) converted much of our TCP/IP stack not to use locals. This
|was mostly on ARM7 devices, but the figures for other 32 bit CPUs of
|the period (say 15 years ago) were similar. Code density improved by
|about 25% and performance by about 50%.
 
How much time did that conversion cost?  And this Stephen Pelc
suggested that Buzz McCool (and probably everyone else) should also
spend their time on avoiding and eliminating locals from their code.
 
I am with you here, not with the other Stephen Pelc: Programmers
should use locals liberally if it saves them time, even in the face of
slow locals implementations, because you can buy a lot of CPU cycles
for the additional programming cost of avoiding locals.

What you ignore is that the constraints of embedded systems with small
alow CPUs (by comparison with desktop CPUs) are very different from
those of desktop CPUs. Converting the TCP/IP stack was driven by the
client requirement to fit a TCP/IP app into 128k/256k Flash and 16k RAM.

I would not make that trade off today.

So there's only one Stephen Pelc but two application domains.

Stephen
--
Stephen Pelc, stephen@vfxforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering, Ltd. - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)78 0390 3612,  +34 649 662 974
http://www.mpeforth.com
   MPE website
http://www.vfxforth.com/downloads/VfxCommunity/
   downloads