Thread: How can I improve/shorten my C code?

Originally Posted by awsdert

If you want to go to extremes for improving then add booleans called isVowel and isDigit, use them like this:

Code:

c = tolower(c);
isDigit = (c >= '0' & c <= '9');
isVowel = (c == 'a' | c == 'e' | c == 'i' | c == 'o' | c == 'u' );
vowelCount +=  isVowel;
if ( isDigit )
  puts("...");
else if ( !isVowel )
{
  conCount++;
  // Your loop
}

For further extremes do it in ASM and utilise the MUL instruction to set and address to goto when a statement is false to and then use the GOTO instruction I think to goto to that address or 0 (next address), 0 for continue into the "if" block, address for skip the block, it basically is a hack of sorts for removing the slowest part of code, branch instructions (used by if/else if/switch/case statements)

a) Why are you using bitwise OR?
b) Parenthesis where they're not required could, arguably, be regarded as clutter
c) I have no idea what you're talking about regarding the MUL, GOTO is. Further, removing branch instructions?! What for? To remove the slowest part of the code? This is premature optimisation on steroids and would make the code an unreadable and unmaintainable mess. There is no need to avoid branch/eliminate instructions. wow. Obfuscating code by doing stuff like avoiding branches will more than likely get in the way of the compiler's optimiser and maybe (or even likely when you take things to such extremes) result in SLOWER code, not faster

Originally Posted by awsdert

a) so the comiller doesn't try to sneak in branches for the sake of that expression
b) That's a POV thing, I prefer the brackets
c) MUL & GOTO are ASM instructions, not C language, I take it you haven't dabbled much if at all in ASM

a) Using bitwise OR the way you used it there is broken (it won't work... seriously)
b) Yep, fair enough. I and many others find them annoying
c) GOTO is not an ASM instruction. I take it that you haven't dabbled in ASM. Even if GOTO *was* an ASM instruction it's a branch