[Dimensio]

It is a conceit of the fragmented modern mind that "only subject matter experts" are qualified to discuss any particular subject matter. In fact, any of us who are familar with logic as it applies to evaluating the internal consistency of truth claims are qualified to discuss the biologists' interpretation of their evidence.

So how can you discuss the biologists' interpretation of their evidence if you don't acutally understand the underlying science behind their interpretation?

(If you're familiar with assembly language -- especially Motorola 68HC11 E9 ASM, then please ignore this and let me know so that I can find something more suitable)

http://members.iglou.com/darkstar/G9L4-2.txt

Examine that and tell me if you think that I could have coded it in a more efficient fashion.

[shubi]

Its the one opinion is as good as another fallacy. ;-)

[Elsie]

I'll say YES before looking at it.

EVERYTHING could be more efficient.

Does it fit into the memory you've budgetted it for?

[Elsie]

I looked, and the individual lines of code are fairly well documented as to what is going on, but the overall function of the device was unclear to me.

[Elsie]

You need ANOTHER program; one that will randomly change some bits in the one you are wondering about, and we'll wait for a more efficient one to show up.

In this memory hungry world we live in, resources are stretched thin. A meaner, leaner code would DEFINITELY have an advantage over slower, more convoluted stuff that will probably overflow its stack at some point in the future anyway.

[js1138]

Examine that and tell me if you think that I could have coded it in a more efficient fashion.

Reminds me of a contest published in 80 Microcomputing, which called for fastest code to fill the screen with a character and the shortest program to do the same. There were hundreds of distinct entries. I believe the fastest code consisted of 1024 push statements.