what is fast dynamically linked executable or statically linked executable ?how to decide?

[Flash Gordon]

Dave Vandervies wrote, On 06/03/07 18:29:

It also has a much larger working memory, so it can make bigger-picture
optimizations without getting lost in details.
Yes.


The good assembly language programmers still have the advantage of
being able to start with what the compiler does and improve on that.
No competent assembly programmer will be beat by an optimizing compiler
they have access to, since the worst case is to compare the compiler's
output to their code and decide to use the compiler's version.
They can also get away with leaving the little things to the compiler
and focus on the parts of the program that *really* *matter*, where
saving one or two CPU cycles actually adds up to something noticeable.

Most of my experience with assembler has fallen in to one of two
situations. Either we did not have a compiler, but I could see looking
at the assembler others had written that even a poor compiler could do
better, or we did have a compiler but for some specific situations the
code produced was not fast enough and when examined I could see we would
be better off writing that small section completely from scratch (it was
not shave 1 or 2 clock cycles off, it was more like reduce execution
time by 50%).

I do, however, accept what you say that if the assembler programmer has
access to the code produced by the compiler s/he can always just say
"I'll go with that".