Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 14:28:26 06/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2000 at 06:15:55, Christophe Theron wrote: >On June 14, 2000 at 17:29:07, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On June 14, 2000 at 16:17:25, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>The availability of 64 bits processors changes nothing. Unless some 64 bits >>>processors are so lousy that 8, 16 and 32 bits operations become slower than 64 >>>bits ops...! :) >> >>I don't think it is unusual for certain operations on sizes smaller than the >>processor word size to take longer than they would if they used the processor's >>word size. Indeed, it wouldn't even be unusual for it to be possible without >>first sign-extending or zero-extending from the smaller size to the processor >>word size. AFAIK, 80x86 is a bit freaky in that it tries very hard to support >>8-bit and 16-bit operations in registers as quickly as 32-bit operations. >> >>Dave > > >That would be a very unfair way for bitboards to win the contest! :) > > > Christophe Just define everything in your program as an int. It will automatically use the processor's word size, so problem solved. :) -Tom
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.