Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 11:07:06 08/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2002 at 15:12:49, Tony Werten wrote: >On August 03, 2002 at 15:01:03, Dave Kuntzsch wrote: > >>Well, I've been hanging around here for some time now and have decided to >>convert and continue developing a program written in assembler many years ago >>for a Z80 cpu. I'm ready to pop for a C or C++ compiler and believe either the >>MS or Intel versions would probably be best. My criteria are ease of use, >>efficiency of compiled code, development tools, and vendor update support. I >>expect that my processor will always be Intel based, but I would like to have >>the option to optimize for processor manufacturer and family. I currently have >>no experience with C or C++, but do in several other languages. One other >>question: Do I need a separate assembler to handle inline assembly code with >>these compilers? Any thoughts are appreciated. Thanks. > >Depends on what experience you have. Is it Pascal then easiest is to use Delphi. >The difference is marginal (or non-existant) compared to C(++) that 'marginal difference' is about factor 2. How many nodes a second do you generate after 1.e4,e5 2.d4,d5 and at which processor (so not movelists a second but #movelists*#semilegals divided by time)? >Most modern compilers have a build-in assembler to handle inline asm. >Tony Amazingly still getting used by crafty, but apart from that assembly is of course soon getting outdated, because each processor and OS has its own assembly, even though it can give another factor 2. The portability issue is just too big for assembly. > >> >>Dave
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.