Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:14:20 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Bruno Barberi Gnecco <brunobg AT geocities DOT com>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Analizing profile / what's _doprnt
In-Reply-To: <35561e0b.13598072@news.unisys.com.br>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980511121029.19471G-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 10 May 1998, Bruno Barberi Gnecco wrote:

> Would it be better to output char by char using putc (because the output is made
> of string, generated a char a time) instead of fprintf("%s")?

Yes, certainly.  If you generate the output a character at a time, 
fprintf is a lot of overkill for you, as the profile shows.

> Or would be fast way bufferize it?

putc uses buffered I/O as well.  That is, nothing is written to the 
file/device until you fill a buffer with characters, or call fflush
explicitly.

> Is there a faster assembler function to substitute fprintf?

IMHO it would be madness to write the guts of _doprint in assembly.  And 
I don't believe it would be much faster anyway.