News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on “Clean” Code, Horrible Performance. Parent comment

Re:“Clean” Code, Horrible Performance by badsectoracula on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @06:26PM (#34976424)
> instead of loading the address and jumping to it push the address then return to it

I remember doing that in a code generator ages ago because it was easier than calculating the jump offset :-P

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Clean” Code, Horrible Performance by Taniwha on Wednesday March 01, 2023 @02:24PM (#34987010)
every subroutine return after that would be miss-predicted
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Clean” Code, Horrible Performance by badsectoracula on Thursday March 02, 2023 @04:05AM (#34993621)
FWIW i wasn't trying to make an optimizing compiler, i was experimenting with replacing an interpreter for a scripting language with a JIT, so even bad native code was still faster than the interpreter :-).

It wasn't really used anywhere, eventually i decided to keep the interpreter and move any complex logic in C which ultimately was the simpler approach (and which has been my take on scripting languages for years now: use scripting languages for the "what" and native code for the "how").

[ Parent | on HN ]