Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
From: Elliott Oti <oti AT phys DOT uu DOT nl>
Subject: Re: How to make DJGPP treat an int as 16-bit in size.
Sender: usenet AT phys DOT uu DOT nl (News system Tijgertje)
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.980813113908.17935A-100000@ruunat.phys.uu.nl>
In-Reply-To: <35D28E1D.A118D67E@xtra.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 09:40:17 GMT
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 980803163922 DOT 3493A-100000 AT is> <35CA13A8 DOT 31E1F541 AT unb DOT ca> <35CA4576 DOT 7CE600EB AT cartsys DOT com> <35D28E1D DOT A118D67E AT xtra DOT co DOT nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Organization: Physics and Astronomy, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands
Lines: 18
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, Kester Maddock wrote:

>   In a source file I saw recently, the programmer had commented: "Change to
> shorts so
> fits in the CPU cache better."  This is DJGPP code (of course :-)  This does of
> course
> make sense to me.
> So which is faster: shorts, from the cache, but with the 16 bit override, or
> ints (longs) with no 16 bit overide but possibly overflowing the cache?
> The array has between 322 to about 1080 elements.

Time it both ways and see.

  Elliott Oti
  kamer 104, tel (030-253) 2516 (RvG)    
  http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~oti