Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » "better" version of Iscale functions
Re: "better" version of Iscale functions [message #15160 is a reply to message #15140] Sun, 06 April 2008 04:51 Go to previous message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14267
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
I can agree, but I think more and more that the lack of width specs in C++ is really a nasty stuff.
Now it's too late, but if I'd have to write a framework from scratch, I'd use some typedef'd int8, int16, int32 and so on stuffs.


Well, that might not be that good either.

I see "int" as type that is at least 32-bit (not correct, but reasonable guess today) and is the most optimal for target architecture.

There might be CPU where int is 64-bit and 32-bit bit int is in fact less optimal. In that case, using int32 everywhere would mean less optimal code.

Mirek
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: The very strange xterm issue
Next Topic: rvalue vs Pick
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Sep 01 21:37:33 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.10187 seconds