-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Simple speed up of Lesson 1 #28
Comments
Thank you, this is a good point! |
Hi, You can also do the same for: |
I closed the issue, after trying both gcc and clang-8 as compilers, and the current standards for those, are that they (at any optimization level) will do what (supposedly is called) loop unhoisting, and compilers are smart enough today, to figure out that, if the variable is not a global one (therefore thread safe), it will move it out of the for loop. But it's always a good thing to consider I suppose. |
Somehow my version seems to still win :D gotta test the wireframe test
First off, amazing content. But changing the line drawing function, so that it does not check if it is steep, within the for loop, almost speeds it up by 2x, with -O3 on. So, with sacrificing for a little extra code bloat, if one changes the for loop, from
to instead
We suddenly eliminate one of the biggest bad guys in programming, branching, and especially branching inside for loops. This also leaves even more room for the optimizer to optimize better. Granted, some optimizer (perhaps) are smart enough to see this on it's own, but it really isn't good practice to count on that in this case. Using rudimentary system_clock and measuring in microseconds, drawing the wire frame image, goes from around ~44000us to ~22000 us, on my system. So it's a pretty impressive speedup to eliminate the branch instruction inside a loop.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: