 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I finally managed to get the IBM xlc compiler on AIX to compile povray
> (See my note in povray.unix) and I was going through the options and saw
> that I can generate 64 bit code and 32 bit code, any clue if this will
> make a difference to pov's performance? Or will will it have any other
> side effect's?
There are very tricky things done with 32 bits integers and floats in
the octree storage code.
Unfortunately I only got 32-bit processors, and nobody completed the
alpha port of PvMegaPOV, so I can't tell you more about this particular
issue in modern machines.
--
__ __ __ __ _
| | / \ / / |_ / |/
\/\/ \__/ /_ /_ |__ \_ |\
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
> BTW, I am not sure if you aware of it, but C/C++ "int" should always be 32
> bit and "long" should always be 64 in current implementations by common
> agreement.
What is common agreement? That my ints are 32 bit _and_ my longs
are 32 bit (and I guess so are yours). I still have to see an
implementation (on common machines, i.e. Linux/Windows/Apple,...)
that has 64 bit longs (apart from __int64 and the like).
> An implementation that uses 64 bit "int" types is not very
> common to say the least. For a full reference (not the ultimate one, but
> the one that I could find in 10 seconds), see
> <http://www.opengroup.org/public/tech/aspen/lp64_wp.htm>
If the machine architecture is 64 bits, then integers will be
exactly that (and stay equal in size to longs, as they are
on todays 32 bit platforms).
Markus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Markus Becker <bec### [at] aicoss de> wrote:
: I still have to see an
: implementation (on common machines, i.e. Linux/Windows/Apple,...)
: that has 64 bit longs (apart from __int64 and the like).
Is UltraSparc a common machine?
: If the machine architecture is 64 bits, then integers will be
: exactly that (and stay equal in size to longs, as they are
: on todays 32 bit platforms).
The UltraSparc and Alpha processors are 64-bit, and both have 32-bit ints
and 64-bit longs.
--
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3B6FF732.E94C5F53@aicoss.de> , Markus Becker <bec### [at] aicossde>
wrote:
> What is common agreement?
You did check out the link, didn't you? For an "official" summary you may
want to read <http://www.opengroup.org/public/tech/aspen/aspenf.htm>. To me
this sounds like a common agreement, doesn't it?
> That my ints are 32 bit _and_ my longs
> are 32 bit (and I guess so are yours). I still have to see an
> implementation (on common machines, i.e. Linux/Windows/Apple,...)
> that has 64 bit longs (apart from __int64 and the like).
I was talking about 64 bit architectures!
> If the machine architecture is 64 bits, then integers will be
> exactly that (and stay equal in size to longs, as they are
> on todays 32 bit platforms).
Nope. It will be 32 bit for int and 64 bit for long on all professional
Unix versions by default (of course taking into account backward
compatibility issues). I think (from the link I cited) DEC/Compaq, HP, IBM,
Intel, Novell, NCR, and Sun are sufficient to call it common (together at
least 99% market share of 64 bit workstations and servers)...
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
[also replying to warp]
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
> > What is common agreement?
>
> You did check out the link, didn't you? For an "official" summary you may
> want to read <http://www.opengroup.org/public/tech/aspen/aspenf.htm>. To me
> this sounds like a common agreement, doesn't it?
This is indeed common agreement. In the unix world. This has
nothing to do with any standards regarding C and/or C++.
The only thing that is (cross-platform) guaranteed is:
sizeof(char)<=sizeof(short)<=sizeof(int)<=sizeof(long)
and
sizeof(char)==1
Decide for your self what this can mean. And I have heard
that in the Wintel world (wich also has a 64 Bit architecture
available) ints remain 32 bit. This is also common agreement.
And, as I take it, the same as in the unix world. But it
is not guaranteed.
> I was talking about 64 bit architectures!
I forgot that eg. Alpha is 64 bit.
Markus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
