On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:44 AM, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net>wrote:
> ... > processor bw >> memory bw ==> smaller integers faster > memory bw >> processor bw ==> natural integers faster > > (this is yet another reason that int_fast* are a half-baked idea. > how does the compiler know this relation for the target machine > ahead of time?) ... > I think that is all so, and I'm not necessarily trying to defend its problems, but on the same note, similar assumptions are also make about int, and it can be argued that int_fast* etc just become par for that course, especially given that there may be command line arguments allowing the user to give some of these things a poke so to speak. And this is not alone in those kinds of things (which are probably not even really engineering compromises), for instance, take malloc. -- Greg Comeau / 4.3.10.1 with C++0xisms now in beta! Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90. Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
