Warp wrote:
>   That's precisely one of the reasons why I like C++'s design (even though
> I'm also aware of its flaws in other respects). Given my line of work, 

Yah. Given that what I tend to do is complex interrelated data structures 
with trivial amounts of math added, it doesn't seem as beneficial to me.

> even if your algorithms are ok. (OTOH this is not really a problem exclusive
> to C++, as C and many other "low-level" languages will have the exact same
> problems.)

I think that's probably true of pretty much every language. I once spent an 
hour removing the loops from the professor's APL code, and the run time went 
from 15 minutes to about 30 seconds. And of course one major reason you have 
a DBA is that SQL can give you crappy performance even if the algorithms are 
decent.

>   (Btw, about the C++ program in that webpage: I think that if he had told
> gcc to generate SSE code rather than FPU code, he would have got the desired
> rounding without having to resort to inline asm...)

Maybe he was trying to use the same FPU code that the other languages were 
using. SSE uses a whole different execution model, yes?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message