Re: problem with constructor/destructor?

• Previous message: Richard Herring: "Re: calloc.... Why?"
• In reply to: John Harrison: "Re: problem with constructor/destructor?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:32:31 +0200

> It's likely that when some_calculation returns the entire farray will be
> copied. With reference counting you can be sure that it will not be.

yeah i understand...
but if i'd need this stuff probably i'll better use directly the very
good TNT by Pozo and adapt to my need adding some stuff.

In fact my idea was just to write a faster and simpler version of Tnt...
it is simpler in the mean that the assembly code of my program does not
contain any call like the code generated by the fortran litteral
translation.

TNT which is ref counted instead generates a function to access array
elements .

Strangely performance difference between my class and TNT are less than
0.5 % (probably cause RAM is slower than cache-function call) and both
with gnu g++ are 40 % FASTER than F90 compiled with Intel ifort 8.0

both g++ and ifort are used with a lot of flags to assure best
optimization.

-- 
Hai recensioni nel cassetto di musica, cinema, letteratura,fumetti??
Ascolta e pentiti e se hai tempo vergognati
http://tonysuper.altervista.org

• Previous message: Richard Herring: "Re: calloc.... Why?"
• In reply to: John Harrison: "Re: problem with constructor/destructor?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]