Author: James Robertson
Date: 11:14:37 04/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
>I must disagree with you. Firstly, speed is critical for chess. How to get >maximum speed? - use hand-optimized assembler. That is NOT lunacy, it is plain >common sense. It might be difficult, but if the results are better it certainly >does not make it mad. Much of my program is written in assembler, so I shall be >expecting a visit from the men in the long white coats soon! You miss my point. Obviously, it cannot be complete lunacy, as Franz Morsch actually did it, and he has one of the most successful programs in the world. I was talking tongue in cheek. Several speed-critical functions in my program are written in hand-coded assembler too. But, whatever it is, it cannot be common sense. As far as I know, Fritz and Rebel are the only PC programs written in assembler. Both are commercial, and apparently, Ed Schroeder had enough of assembler, as he announced he was translating his program into C++ (very wise, if you ask me). > >Second, Visual Basic is more than 20 times slower than the best commercial >Basic >compilers Yes, but I wasn't talking about Basic; I was talking about VB. >- if you are going to talk about Basic, at least see what a modern >efficient (as opposed to virtual anything!) Basic compiler can do. There are >Basic compilers now that will compile small, fast executables to run under Win9x >and Win NT, and they include a full 32-bit in-line assembler as well - blows the >wheels of Visul C, and C++. The Basic compilers are faster than VC++? I haven't heard this before; perhaps you could give me some websites for more information? I am also a good Basic programmer, and if it is faster..... James > >Roberto I see your point, but
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.