6 ms·
I saw that ;-) The translation is: do { to.set((from = from.shift(1)).get(-1)); } while(--count > 0); which looks correct to me. Hence my question w
by marco2357 11y ago
I saw that ;-) The translation is:
do {
to.set((from = from.shift(1)).get(-1));
} while(--count > 0);
which looks correct to me. Hence my question what orodley thinks is wrong.
- jmuhlich 11y agoI think you might be looking at the wrong thing on the Wikipedia page. The core feature of Duff's Device is interleaved switch and do statements: n = (count + 7) / 8; switch (count % 8) { case 0: do { *to = *from++; case 7: *to = *from++; case 6: *to = *from++; case 5: *to = *from++; case 4: *to = *from++; case 3: *to = *from++; case 2: *to = *from++; case 1: *to = *from++; } while (--n > 0); } (extraneous register statements removed for conciseness)