Duff's device( 达夫设备)

Tom Duff曾经写过这样的函数，其中使用了奇怪的switch...case，他自己称之为duff's device。猛一看，似乎不合乎C的语法规则。但实际上能在所有C编译器下编译通过。其效率据说可以大大提高。

Anoop写了一个程序进行测试。转贴如下：

/* The Duff device
 *
 * An infamous example of how a compiler can accept code that should
 * be illegal as per the language definition. To add insult to injury,
 * the illegal code actually runs faster.
 *
 * The functions send and send2 accomplish the same goal (copying a
 * string from one location to another) but send2 manages to screw
 * with your head and achieve its goal much faster (on most
 * architectures).
 *
 * The answer to the puzzle of how send2 actually works is exposed in
 * the function send3 (see the comment above the function send3).
 *
 * This strange piece of code is named after the programmer who
 * discovered this 'optimization' technique.
 *
 * -- Anoop Sarkar <anoop at cs.sfu.ca>
 **/

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/time.h>

/* pick BUFLEN to be a suitably large number to show the speed
     difference between send and send2 */
const size_t BUFLEN = 100000000;

void
send (register char *to, register char *from, register int count)
{
    do
      *to++ = *from++;
    while(--count>0);
}

void
send2 (register char *to, register char *from, register int count)
{
    register int 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);
    }
}

/* The answer to the mystery turns out to be simple loop unfolding.
 * send2 uses the semantics for switch statements in C to provide a
 * mnemonic for how many assignments should occur within the body of
 * the do-while loop.
 *
 * So why is send2 faster than send on some architectures? The
 * conditional is a slow instruction to execute on many machine
 * architectures.
 *
 * Try compiling with gcc with and without the -O3 flag. Turning the
 * optimizer on (using -O3) shows the power of code optimization: send
 * runs as fast as send2 with the optimizer on.
 **/

int main (int argc, char **argv)
{
    char *from, *to;
    int i;
    struct timeval before, after;

    from = (char *) malloc(BUFLEN * sizeof(char));
    to = (char *) malloc(BUFLEN * sizeof(char));

    memset(from, 'a', (BUFLEN * sizeof(char)));
    printf("array init done/n");

    printf("calling send/n");
    gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
    send(to, from, BUFLEN);
    gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
    printf("secs=%d/n", after.tv_sec - before.tv_sec);

    printf("calling send2/n");
    gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
    send2(to, from, BUFLEN);
    gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
    printf("secs=%d/n", after.tv_sec - before.tv_sec);

    if (strcmp(from,to) == 0) {
      printf("from=to/n");
    } else {
      printf("from!=to/n");
    }

    free(from);
    free(to);

    return(0);
}

运行结果：
[redbull@calabash tmp]$gcc -O3 duff.c
[redbull@calabash tmp]$ ./a.out
array init done
calling send
secs=4
calling send2
secs=1
from=to