Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re: A better mod (%) operator?

by samtregar (Abbot)
on Jul 08, 2002 at 21:34 UTC ( #180333=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: A better mod (%) operator?
in thread A better mod (%) operator?

Or better yet, Inline::ASM.

But I agree with your other statements - I'd be very surprised to find a Perl program where a division operation was a significant bottleneck.

-sam

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: A better mod (%) operator?
by tadman (Prior) on Jul 08, 2002 at 22:59 UTC
    From the Inline::ASM documentation:
    WARNING

    Do NOT use assembler to write Perl extensions! It's sick and wrong!
    Better. Evil. Muhahaha.

      Saw that too. Begs the question: Why does it exist?

        Because it's one wicked cool hack to be able to write perl with inline assembler. The biggest problem is that the asm isn't portable between threaded and nonthreaded versions of the same version and arch of perl.


        We are using here a powerful strategy of synthesis: wishful thinking. -- The Wizard Book

        For those occasions when you've got to do what you've got to do, probably. There are some things you just can't do in C alone, though they are rare.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://180333]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others exploiting the Monastery: (4)
As of 2020-11-25 02:48 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?