The Best Solution

[Darrel Taylor]

Darrel may recognize some of his tricks

Ha,

I knew that stuff would come in handy some day.

Nice comparisons.
<br>

[T.Jackson]

Thanks for sharing those figures with us Steve. Repeat is the same as a conditional (DO Loop) ? Main reason DO's are faster is because unlike For Nexts, they don't have counters. In VB, (For Nexts) are idiot proof making them relatively bloated & slow.
<br/>

[mister_e]

Repeat is the same as a conditional (DO Loop) ?

Yes indeed.

Main reason DO's are faster is because unlike For Nexts, they don't have counters.

mmm yes and no. Here what reduce the speed is more likely the .0[Temp] stuff. Let's see

@   SIZESTART
    for temp = 0 to 7
        next temp
@   SIZEEND "FOR-TO-NEXT"
 
@   SIZESTART
    temp = 0
    repeat
        temp=temp+1
        until temp = 8
@  SIZEEND "REPEAT - UNTIL"

FOR-TO-NEXT: 13 WORDS, 113 UsEC
REPEAT - UNTIL: 9 WORDS, 72 UsEC

about the same code space, 41uSec of difference in the speed for the whole thing.

But now, have a look at this

@   SIZESTART
    Summe_Alarm.0 = 0
@   SIZEEND "Direct Bit Addressing"
 
@   SIZESTART
    temp = 0
    summe_Alarm.0[temp] = 0
@  SIZEEND ".0[Temp] stuff"

Direct Byte Addressing: 1 WORDS, 1 UsEC
.0[Temp] stuff: 10 WORDS, 47 UsEC

That's 46 uSec BY single instructions/lines like that. So... much revealant when you use them a loop that the loop itself.

[mister_e]

Ha,

I knew that stuff would come in handy some day.

yup, kinda REALLY handy stuff. I use it a lot here in a custom INCLUDE FILE! YES you heard me, STEVE USE INCLUDE FILES NOW
(refer to those http://www.picbasic.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=2108 and http://www.picbasic.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=2400 )

So it's a kind of personal mix of old and pretty old previous thread

Those wanting to know where the idea came from, i think those bellow are the main resources

• Embedded Strings in your Code Space
• While we're on the subject of optimization...
• The EXT (external) modifier.
• How much code would a code hog hog
• instruction execution time

See what you have done with me !

[paul borgmeier]

IF (ml_value[temp]-$5B)<$27 THEN
    Summe_alarm.0[temp]=0
ELSE
    summe_alarm.0[temp]=1
ENDIF

When used with FOR NEXT or any of the others, this should further cut time and code space .....

ASM anyone?

[mister_e]

Worth to measure it... do we need to start a 'coding challenge' here... if so, i'll warn Darrel, he like that

[paul borgmeier]

Worth to measure it... do we need to start a 'coding challenge' here... if so, i'll warn Darrel, he like that

I didn't take the time to check everything except code words for a few cases. It looks like it saves some; the amount depends on what it is inserted between.

you might want to warn Bruce as well

[mister_e]

Yes but first, we have to get rid of the .0[temp] for speed (see previous post).

i'm thinking of some kind of aliasing... but, i keep thinking...

Yeah, it's getting interesting