Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Crafty profits little from Itanium and Opteron versus Commercials

Author: Gerd Isenberg

Date: 02:18:10 08/08/03

Go up one level in this thread


On August 07, 2003 at 23:21:56, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On August 07, 2003 at 08:58:21, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>
>It is a waste of time to actively PROGRAM in assembly for PC applications like
>this one. I won't say it's a waste for the NT kernel for example. Each new
>generation of cpu's requires an entire rewrite of the program. But well written
>C code keeps portable.
>
>If Frans each new version first has to rewrite in order to get it to work better
>at the new processor then some who read this for the first time now know what
>his daily work is.
>
>Working hard to get the current program ported.
>
>That he manages to make some modifications as well to it is really amazing.
>
>That some people like Sune and i know many other programmers who didn't post
>here but have loads of inline assembly too written. Half of them regrets it now.
>
>Of course taking a look to how assembly works and what is faster for a processor
>is a different thing. Study is never bad. Wasting time on getting routine X to
>work in your own written assembly just to get your program 0.001% faster is
>really a waste of time where you write at the same time that buying an opteron
>is not interesting yet as it is too expensive.
>
>Just buy that bit faster hardware and don't make it in assembly :)
>
>Saves time. Saves money.
>
>Just throw some hardware at it!
>
>Of course i won't say it is smart for everyone to throw 500 cpu's at it.
>
>I'll do that for them with DIEP :)
>
>Oh by the way in case i didn't mention it. I can compile diep at that machine
>because i use NO assembly at it.
>
>I find it very funny to read that most bitboarders first slow down their program
>in case of Sune to get 30% faster using inline assembly :)
>
>Same for Isenberg's Kogge Stone project. Move generation just in those
>registers? Hehehehehehehehehe. Waste of your time Gerd!

Hehehehe. For me a set based approach fits better in my abstactions schemes and
thinking patterns. I don't think it is a waste of time - at least it is fun for
me.

Gerd


<snip>



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.