Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kapkan4u who wrote (150458)	11/29/2001 8:56:48 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Kap, Re: "Are you saying that large switch statements are frivolous and never happen in real life?" Large switch statements happen, but they are rare. There are many routes to take besides resorting to large switch statements. Being the prime programmer you claim to be, you ought to know that. Now, compound a large switch statement with a completely random and arbitrary switch variable. Sure, it can happen if the variable is unpredictable, but normally switch statements tend to compensate for long branch structures, and those are likely to number sequentially, not randomly. Then, you take that rare, large switch statement, and put it in an even larger outer loop. Ever study 'O' notation, Kap? It's a rudimentary computer science concept, so any first year programmer could tell that your program is going to have poor performance (on any CPU). Finally, you specifically engineer the numbers so that it doesn't fits in the cache of the CPU. You even admitted in your last post that your block of code does not model any kind of real world application. You specifically engineered it (and probably took you a long time) to perform terribly on the Pentium 4 core. And it proves nothing. wbmw