Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: Dave Hansen <iddw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 May 2007 17:42:30 -0700
On May 30, 5:15 pm, rhapg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I'm trying to get a feel for what people now consider more important,
optimisations or debugging ability. In the past with such tight memory
limits I would have said optimisations but now with expanded-memory
parts becoming cheaper I would think that debugging ability is more
important in a development tool. It's is not exactly a black and
white question, debug or smallused, but more a ratio. eg. 50% debug/
50% optimised or 70% debug/30% optimised, etc.
The rule is "Make it right, _then_ make it fast." Fast enough is fast
enough. If the optimizer makes your code undebuggable, and you need
the debugger, don't use the optimizer.
That said, I generally set my compiler to optimize for space. It
hasn't really caused me any debugging troubles in at least 5 or 10
years. Of course, most of my debug activity resembles inserting
printf statements rather than stepping through code in an emulator.
YMMV.
Regards,
-=Dave
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: David Brown
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- References:
- What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: rhapgood
- What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Prev by Date: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Next by Date: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Previous by thread: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Next by thread: Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|