Xref: news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:5192
From: Hartmut Schirmer <hsc AT techfak DOT uni-kiel DOT d400 DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Speed optimization: memcpy() or for loop ??  ** Some actual test results **
Date: 20 Jun 1996 08:05:21 GMT
Organization: Technische Fakultaet
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <4qb0o1$9r@purzel.techfak.uni-kiel.de>
References: <4pmlrp$p7u AT crc-news DOT doc DOT ca> <31C2577D DOT 22FD99BD AT alcyone DOT com> <4q679q$4op AT snlsu1> <4q9k75$bgg AT crc-news DOT doc DOT ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zora.techfak.uni-kiel.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: richard DOT young AT crc DOT doc DOT ca
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

richard DOT young AT crc DOT doc DOT ca (Richard Young) wrote:
>> Richard Young wrote:
>> > A question for the optimization experts:
>> > For moving data, is it faster to use
>> > 
>> > a) memcpy(x,y,n*sizeof(x[0]))
>> > or
>> > b) for (i = 0; i < n; i++) x[i] = y[i];
>> > 
>> > or are they basically the same speed.
>
>
>The results are:  NO DIFFERENCE.
>

Note: memcpy speed is independent from selected optimization !
-- 
Hartmut Schirmer                        | Phone: +49-431-77572-709  FAX: -703
Automatisierungs- u. Regelungstechnik,  | hsc AT techfak DOT uni-kiel DOT d400 DOT de
Technische Fakult"at, Universit"at Kiel,| http://www.techfak.uni-kiel.de/~hsc
Kaiserstr. 2, D-24143 Kiel, Germany     | PGP key via WWW, Key ID:6D84AEC1