[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Don_Adan

I dont know, seems he not always like fastest code, maybe Amiga version will be too fast?

I think litwr wants fastest and smallest, so it's a bit tricky. Is a 5% speedup worthwhile if it adds 4 bytes to the file size?

On litwr's benchmark site the main loop code size is 54 bytes on a 50MHz 68030 vs 57 bytes (~6% larger) on a 25MHz 386, while the 386 would theoretically be ~5% faster if running at the same clock speed. Some speed optimization might make the Amiga code 5% quicker but 5% larger, and therefore virtually identical to the 386 (except that the 030 is 25% faster in real terms because 386's top out at 40MHz).

It's also good to see the Amiga 1200 with Blizzard 1230-IV beating a 36MHz ARM3 and a 33MHz 80486 (though of course these figures don't mean much in the real world).

At first is necessary to understand Litwr code, later code can be optimised. Critical code perhaps can be shortest/fastest only a few, but other code called only once still can be shortened.

Fair enough, but ultimately we want to know what our efforts have achieved. Hoping to see a side-by-side comparison between the original code and the final optimized version.

Here is example:
from
move #10,d4
to
moveq #10,D4

Mostly time calculation routine can be optimised for space.

Wow, such easy pickings! Perhaps the total size can still be shrunk quite a lot and get even quicker!