X-pop3-spooler: POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 4 980420 -bs- Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980719231451.0093c7c0@xs4all.nl> X-Sender: diep AT xs4all DOT nl X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 23:14:54 +0000 To: Marc Lehmann , beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl From: Vincent Diepeveen Subject: Re: PGCC's optimizations (continued) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: Marc Lehmann Status: RO X-Status: A Content-Length: 1745 Lines: 48 At 10:08 PM 7/19/98 +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote: >On Sat, Jul 18, 1998 at 02:00:15AM +0100, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >This is quite interesting... are you sure that you compile these programs in >> >C mode as opposed to mcirosofts combined c-c++ thing? In C, there are many >> >clearly defined type conversions which need an explicit cast in C++. >> >> all c code, and initially you don't notice the casting problems. > >No, I meant did you compile the C program in your compilers "C mode" or >"C++ mode", as these are two different languages, and C++ is much >pickier about casts. (There are other bad things in c++ as well ;) the files are .c and .h So i guess that's C mode. I don't have "extern C {" or something. >> In fact it usually works ok. But i'm having masses of pointer structures >> and speedy things. I'll do anything to get faster, as long as i get >> lossless faster. > >but casts don't impove the execution speed in any way. But they are needed if you have a combined datastructure. >> Most chessprograms engines are therefore in assembler. >> >> Mine isn't. >> >> Yet i have learnt a lot about C programming. >> And how well/bad compilers are. > >;) > >[the rest I will look at later] Looking forward to it. It's time that higherlevel languages are gonna win in chess too! > -----==- | > ----==-- _ | > ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- > --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e| > -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ --+ > The choice of a GNU generation | > | > >