//Number of clock cycles withour optimization:
//Lab 2: 25399
//Lab 4: 90641
//Lab 4 OPT=1: 21463
//Lab 4 OPT=2: 21249
//Lab 4 OPT=3: 21283
//Difference of assembly in lab2 and lab4(unoptimized):
//
//
//
//Difference of assembly between optimizations:
// Between opt1 and opt2 there seems to be a lot of value/adress changes. As if the compiler realizes that some values would be faster but at the same time it is more difficult for us, the users to realize why that new value was used.

// In higher optimization the creation of stacks seems to occur more frequent.

//As is said in the previous section, the handling of an efficient pipeline is better. I.e no "nops" in opt3 where as in opt0 there are plenty.

// The usage of reference points( such as ".LEFDE4:") are much more frequent in higher opt's. This results in longer code too which seems counter productive and might be the reason to why we actually get a higher clock count in opt3 than in opt2.

// Last but not least. "Hardcoding" values to ref points and simple hex-values is something that higher optimization does more of.