On 3/23/07, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When I brought up the 16-bit option earlier, Jakub replied that x86 would get hosed worse because it's 16-bit accesses are not as efficient as it's 8 or 32 bit ones.http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-03/msg00763.html I assume you tested on Darwin? Can you tell me if it was ppc or x86?
I tested on x86 (i686-pc-linux-gnu; processor is an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600) and found a 1% slowdown with 16-bit codes vs. 8-bit codes. Cheers, Doug
