3 ms·
Shouldn’t it be *to++ = *from++;
by fractalb 4y ago
Shouldn’t it be
*to++ = *from++;
- jcranmer 4y agoIn the original code, actually, no, incrementing "to" was not desired. The "to" was pointing to a hardware memory-mapped register, and it needed to copy to the same memory location each time.
- fractalb 4y agoDidn’t know that. Thanks
- johnthescott 4y agoamen. seems like back in the day that "reg1 = *pc++;" would have been the fastest op in a computer.