Talk:Interprocedural optimization

Computing: Software C‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Template:Findsourcesnotice

This article addresses the reader and reads in a very disjointed, non-encyclopedic way. It seems like it was copy/pasted from somewhere. 65.75.73.66 22:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree, it seems like it was ripped out of a computer programming magazine or tutorial addressed to somebody who already knows about the subject. It does not explain the subject, history, or give very much background information before diving into the rest of the information, and is very non-encyclopedic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.101.22.199 (talk) 12:04, June 19, 2006

So alright, exert yourselves. 1) Identify the source that was ripped-off, 2) Rewrite the article to taste. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NickyMcLean (talk • contribs) 00:11, June 22, 2006.

Based on what was discussed here: User_talk:NickyMcLean#Interprocedural_optimization, you can read that this article is original. Anyone reading this, feel free to make improvements on the article. -Hyad 08:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thx for the illustrating article -> helped a lot!

I think i found two minor mistakes: 1. In the pseudocode-Example when you reduce the silly function calls you end up with Print 7; Print -6; Print -6;

  Think it should be Print 7; Print -1; Print -6;

Yep, a mistype. Brain pain in presenting the in-line equivalent, then brain absence in copying just the print statements. Oops. NickyMcLean (talk) 22:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

2. The discussion about a prime factor decomposition containing should contain 1 als a prime or not is surplus, cause the uniqueness of a prime factor

  decomposition makes it necessary to not take 1 as a prime factor.

Thx again for the article

Joshua Ham —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.117.150 (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)Reply