Teaching assembly (Re: Bug#443370: ITP: asmutils -- coreutils replacement written in i386 assembler)

2007-09-26 Thread Oleg Verych
23-09-2007, Bernd Zeimetz: > Some more context for compilers: >> I can confirm that it is not faster since I tested it once, I think 'wc' it >> was. And it is definitely not portable to other platforms either :-) >> Nevertheless the package

Re: Bug#443370: ITP: asmutils -- coreutils replacement written in i386 assembler

2007-09-23 Thread Bernd Zeimetz
> I can confirm that it is not faster since I tested it once, I think 'wc' it > was. And it is definitely not portable to other platforms either :-) > Nevertheless the package brings with it some spirit that is good to have: > love to assembly as a language. Maybe there are applications of this

Re: Bug#443370: ITP: asmutils -- coreutils replacement written in i386 assembler

2007-09-23 Thread Steffen Moeller
On Sunday 23 September 2007 21:18:48 Oleg Verych wrote: > 22-09-2007, Steinar H. Gunderson: > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 09:44:04AM +1245, Andreas Fleckl wrote: > >> It features the smallest possible size and memory requirements, the > >> fastest speed, and offers fairly good functionality. > > > >

Re: Bug#443370: ITP: asmutils -- coreutils replacement written in i386 assembler

2007-09-23 Thread Oleg Verych
22-09-2007, Steinar H. Gunderson: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 09:44:04AM +1245, Andreas Fleckl wrote: >> It features the smallest possible size and memory requirements, the fastest >> speed, and offers fairly good functionality. > > Size and memory aside, I sort of doubt asmutils' sort is faster than

Re: Bug#443370: ITP: asmutils -- coreutils replacement written in i386 assembler

2007-09-22 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 09:44:04AM +1245, Andreas Fleckl wrote: > It features the smallest possible size and memory requirements, the fastest > speed, and offers fairly good functionality. Size and memory aside, I sort of doubt asmutils' sort is faster than coreutils' sort just because it's writte