U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Status & Roadmap

Authors & License

Funding Ultimate++

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » "better" version of Iscale functions

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Return to the default flat view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: "better" version of Iscale functions [message #15236 is a reply to message #15231]

Fri, 11 April 2008 09:26

mdelfede is currently offline

mdelfede
Messages: 1308
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

luzr wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 18:01

mdelfede wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 09:07

luzr wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 02:44

Now, this is an argument Smile

Smile

Applied. (I have deleted float version altogether - either it is MSC on Win32 which is unable to do it right using int64, or it is GCC or MSC on ARM and ARM does not have FP).

Mirek

Well, even if usually MSC optimizes better than GCC

Actually, this is no longer true. I am not sure when it happened (IMO sometime around 4.1 version Smile

Smile

, but current GCC produces faster code on average.

Well, I think that when they "killed" the only true competitor in c++ compilers (Borland) they've lost interest on improving their compiler...

Quote:

I guess they just do not detect that it is 32x32... and just use normal 64x64 routine.

Indeed. But that's a really bad optimizer if it can't detect it.

Max

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

[Message index]

		"better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Tue, 01 April 2008 23:10
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mirek on Wed, 02 April 2008 15:11
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Wed, 02 April 2008 16:48
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mirek on Sun, 06 April 2008 04:47
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Sun, 06 April 2008 19:36
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Sun, 06 April 2008 20:05
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Sun, 06 April 2008 20:14
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mirek on Thu, 10 April 2008 02:44
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mirek on Thu, 10 April 2008 02:46
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Thu, 10 April 2008 15:07
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mirek on Thu, 10 April 2008 18:01
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mdelfede on Fri, 11 April 2008 09:26
		Re: "better" version of Iscale functions By: mirek on Sun, 06 April 2008 04:51

Previous Topic:	The very strange xterm issue
Next Topic:	rvalue vs Pick

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

PDF

]

Current Time: Mon Jul 07 09:46:12 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03482 seconds