Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.shell,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously)
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: 8 Nov 2026 01:23:26 GMT
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <nla18dF6ec9U6@mid.individual.net>
References: <18dee4b6cab427fa$865$2574533$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com> <ayudnc43iJgfVXr3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> <11c8mg3$2e89e$2@kst.eternal-september.org> <_ZucnafJTvBFc3r3nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <11c8rq9$1e6t$1@gal.iecc.com> <WfacneJt4NA3sHX3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> <11c9ibo$2e740$1@dont-email.me> <11c9rph$2oln7$7@dont-email.me> <a6%FS.31515$DTve.14247@fx18.ams4> <nktvq5Fahr2U5@mid.individual.net> <11ce4vn$85p2$2@dont-email.me> <nl0dl5Fn18lU1@mid.individual.net> <11cg959$12d33$4@dont-email.me> <nl1si8F670U1@mid.individual.net> <11cirgn$1votj$8@dont-email.me> <11cjsfa$29mft$1@dont-email.me> <wUOdnd6AM6kIOXP3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> <11cn316$3bnof$15@dont-email.me> <11cnd3l$3gjc4$1@dont-email.me> <11co6km$3r41p$2@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net Ef2BcTsoStthN7TDufysbw9qSfH/qzznjHlDHYkNrdiiKJ04GR
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UcOQJPL7qfBNuiTrICQp4jRyq/s= sha256:JkwaSeJ2t8Me9eJAqRWUY7flXSZ9K6+i56AzKvU5yUM=
User-Agent: Pan/0.165 (Kostiantynivka)
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:95338 comp.unix.shell:27339 alt.folklore.computers:236661

On Sat, 7 Nov 2026 21:53:26 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 07/11/2026 14:37, Peter Flass wrote:
>> On 11/7/26 04:45, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2026 04:09, c186282 wrote:
>>>> ASM was also *the* way for the older micro-controllers
>>>>    for a long time. However some of the optimized 'C' compilers can
>>>>    now rival ASM for speed and size and you don't have to hand-code
>>>>    bit-banging serial either
>>>
>>> At some point I idly compiled some gcc C to assembler . I spent a
>>> pointless half hour trying to work out if I could have done it better.
>>>
>>> I couldn't..
>>>
>>> In terms of modern micros I wouldn't even bother unless I couldn't do
>>> it in 'C'.
>>>
>>>
>> But then you add all the cruft that GCC drags in and you're back where
>> you started (size-wise, at least).
> Hardly.
> 
> 
>> When PCs were new I used a compiler called "Aztec C" that had almost no
>> overhead in excess libraries, start-up code, etc., unless you asked for
>> them.
>> 
> Well in general you DO ask for them

I fixed a 20 year old bug that was caused by the programmer deciding 
adding '-lm' to the compilation would be too heavy. iirc his version of 
hypot() worked most of the time.