Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:29:24 07/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2002 at 11:25:48, Sven Reichard wrote: >On July 01, 2002 at 11:03:02, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On July 01, 2002 at 10:11:35, Sven Reichard wrote: >> >>>On June 30, 2002 at 23:09:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 30, 2002 at 13:10:24, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>I was thinking only about a conversion to X86 unix, as in linux. The >>>>"syntax" is reversed between microsoft and GAS, which means _every_ line >>>>of assembly gets modified. >>>> >>>>A _big_ undertaking. Even without the problem of different architectures. >>>><snip> >>> >>>FWIW, there are assemblers for GNU-Linux on x86 that use Intel-style syntax, >>>e.g., nasm. >>>Sven. >> >>How about for supercomputer chips, which is where we talk about. >>we talk about highly optimized x86 assembly , optimized over the years, >>which has to run on a super > >This is an impossible task. I was referring just to the lines above. that's exactly what Bob meant, because we were originally speaking that some people wondered why fritz can't run at a supercomputer. Well besides that it wouldn't play a rating point better at it, it would of course be an impossible task to port.
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.