News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Branchless Doom.

[dead]
Re:Branchless Doom by MaxBarraclough on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @05:21AM (#16221654)
It's neat, and rather funny.

To see an unmodified real-world C program run on a real-world hardware architecture, completely branchless, is pretty damn neat.

The way it takes hours to render a frame of DOOM is hilarious.

I wonder if the compiler will be optimised in future.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by earenndil on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @08:14PM (#16227956)
> unmodified

You have to patch the source though...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by MaxBarraclough on Thursday January 25, 2018 @04:55AM (#16229855)
Oops, you're right! I thought it was only the build system that had to be adjusted.

About half of the code-changes are just to avoid alloca.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by brokenmachine on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @11:21PM (#16220292)
Some ask, "why". Others ask, "why not"...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by jmiserez on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @05:01AM (#16221570)
I always liked that quote. In full:

I hear you say "Why?" Always "Why?" You see things; and you say "Why?" But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"

(https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Bernard_Shaw)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by bitwize on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @06:23AM (#16221889)
"Science isn't about 'why', it's about 'why not'! Why don't you marry safe science if you love it so much!" --Cave Johnson
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by calebtroyer on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @11:35PM (#16220340)
It says why right in the compiler FAQ — "I thought it would be funny"
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Branchless Doom by dang on Tuesday January 23, 2018 @09:24PM (#16219834)
Just being interesting is enough.
[ Parent | on HN ]