Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: Thad Smith <ThadSmith@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:26:15 -0600
Chris Hills wrote:
In article <1180563307.161728.196910@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, rhapgood@xxxxxxxxx writes
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.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
What is VERY worrying is that you were prepared to sacrifice quality to use a smaller (cheaper ) part.
I did not see a suggestion to sacrifice quality. The job is not finished until the code runs correctly, including sufficiently fast within the chosen memory. Now, what tools are the most useful to achieve that?
--
Thad
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: Chris Hills
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: Vladimir Vassilevsky
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- References:
- Re: What's more important optimisations or debugging?
- From: Chris Hills
- Re: 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
|