Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 20:32 UTC
Permalink for comment 402292
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-12-27
Really, when it comes with habits, or less information than needed, small information is worse than having none. And we can miss what is in front of us. So...
To better understand the compiler status let's examine it from different scenario points. This give us a more clear picture, even in absence of other indications, as it allow us to compare and thus to scale the importance of a factor...
Imagine that the compiler:
A - Refuses to work on some CPUs.
B - Makes lousy code, in contrast to be the better one.
C - Uses the best routines available elsewhere as the programmers accept to be compromised or non-competent.
Now Check:
A - Fair... but too disturbing, and everybody complains
B - Unfair... no disturbance, and no complains
C - Fair... no disturbance, better product
I suppose that clears the picture, even to someone unable to evaluate the significance of some facts, and it's significance. Just a try (and an hope)...