Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 16:50:11 09/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2001 at 17:52:29, Sune Fischer wrote: >On September 15, 2001 at 17:11:29, J. Wesley Cleveland wrote: > >>On September 15, 2001 at 16:17:52, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>Note that this fails if a+b = 2^32. It would be expecting too much for a >>compiler to know that this could not happen. Also, pointer notation can cause >>some code to run slower, because the compiler can not perform some optimizations >>because of possible pointer aliasing. > >LOL, thank you all for your insight, I will try rewriting it to use pointers. >I've been using references ever since I read the following in a C++ book: > >"Specifying a parameter to a function as a reference changes the method of >passing data for that parameter. The method used is not pass-by-value where an >argument is copied before being passed, but pass-by-reference where the >parameter acts as an alias for the argument passed. This eliminates any copying >and allows the function to access the caller argument directly. It also means >that the de-referencing, which is required when passing and using a pointer to a >value, is also unnecessary." > >That lead me to believe that pointers where actually slower, however I have >never tested for myself. > >I have always believed that C++ was slower than C, some people I know thinks >otherwise. Anyone have an estimate of how much slower it is? >I've been thinking of rewriting to C++, but no way if it would slow it down! > >-S. c++ is hell slower. if you rape c++ a bit to kind of c a look like code, then it is the same speed like c. a problem with c++ is the allocation and deallocation of objects. memory allocations/deallocations are one of the slowest operations at the computer (apart from swapping to harddisk of course).
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.