Krow.Net

Sat, 31 Oct 2009 23:10:56 GMT

Power Tools and Pumpkin Cutting

DSC_0189.JPG, originally uploaded by krow.

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:45:18 GMT

Game, Which is faster?

Last night while working with someone I am tutoring we got into a conversation of "what is faster". Below is some assembler that was created from it, for two different programs which did exactly the same thing, but in different ways.

The question is, which is faster?
Second Question, which do you think was the more maintainable code?

	.file	"?"
	.text
.globl main
	.type	main, @function
main:
.LFB0:
	.cfi_startproc
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_offset 6, -16
	.cfi_def_cfa_register 6
	subq	$2097184, %rsp
	leaq	-2097184(%rbp), %rax
	movl	$1048576, %edx
	movl	$64, %esi
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	call	memset
	movl	$0, -20(%rbp)
	jmp	.L2
.L5:
	leaq	-1048608(%rbp), %rax
	movq	%rax, -16(%rbp)
	leaq	-2097184(%rbp), %rax
	movq	%rax, -8(%rbp)
	jmp	.L3
.L7:
	nop
.L3:
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %edx
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	movb	%dl, (%rax)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	1(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$1, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	2(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$2, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	3(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$3, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	4(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$4, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	5(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$5, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	6(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$6, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	leaq	7(%rax), %rdx
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$7, %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %eax
	movb	%al, (%rdx)
	addq	$8, -16(%rbp)
	addq	$8, -8(%rbp)
	leaq	-1048608(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$1048576, %rax
	cmpq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	jne	.L7
.L4:
	addl	$1, -20(%rbp)
.L2:
	cmpl	$4095, -20(%rbp)
	jbe	.L5
	movl	$0, %eax
	leave
	ret
	.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
	.size	main, .-main
	.ident	"GCC: (GNU) 4.4.1 20090725 (Red Hat 4.4.1-2)"
	.section	.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

	.file	"?"
	.text
.globl main
	.type	main, @function
main:
.LFB0:
	.cfi_startproc
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_offset 6, -16
	.cfi_def_cfa_register 6
	subq	$2097184, %rsp
	leaq	-2097184(%rbp), %rax
	movl	$1048576, %edx
	movl	$64, %esi
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	call	memset
	movl	$0, -20(%rbp)
	jmp	.L2
.L5:
	leaq	-1048608(%rbp), %rax
	movq	%rax, -16(%rbp)
	leaq	-2097184(%rbp), %rax
	movq	%rax, -8(%rbp)
	jmp	.L3
.L4:
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	movzbl	(%rax), %edx
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	movb	%dl, (%rax)
	addq	$1, -16(%rbp)
	addq	$1, -8(%rbp)
.L3:
	leaq	-1048608(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$1048576, %rax
	cmpq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	jne	.L4
	addl	$1, -20(%rbp)
.L2:
	cmpl	$4095, -20(%rbp)
	jbe	.L5
	movl	$0, %eax
	leave
	ret
	.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
	.size	main, .-main
	.ident	"GCC: (GNU) 4.4.1 20090725 (Red Hat 4.4.1-2)"
	.section	.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits

Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:37:20 GMT

"Fish" Foot Massage

When someone asks "Do you want to get a fish foot massage?", do not assume you just aren't hearing them well and that all you will be receiving a plain old foot massage.

Yes, those are fish in the picture, and yes they are eating the dead skin from my feet.

This is the first time I ever wanted to keep fish around the house. It tickles, but once you get past that?

Awesome :)

Fri, 23 Oct 2009 04:39:55 GMT

Guess!