Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 03:09:48 06/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2000 at 17:43:31, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>On June 15, 2000 at 17:28:26, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>
>>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
>
>Well, half of the commercials are probably using x86 asm for this stuff.
>Oh well, their tough one! :-)
>
>Dave
Chess Tiger is entirely written in C, and I do use the type "int" when I want a
fast int (as often as possible actually).
Christophe
This page took 0 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.