On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Simonson, Lucanus J <lucanus.j.simonson@intel.com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Daryle Walker <darylew@hotmail.com> wrote:
Is there a macro and/or typedef that will tell me bit-length used for a processor and/or the best integer type for said processor? The "int" type is supposed to be that type, and it was in the 16- and 32-bit eras. (I learned C programming with the former in the... early 1990s!) However, the powers-that-be decided, for "backwards compatibility," to freeze "int" and "long" at 32 bits and use a new type, "long long," for 64 bits, which should be the optimized integer type for 64-bit processors. (If they kept to the plan, "int" would be 64 bits, "long" either 64 or 128, "short" up to 32, and the new type will be "short short" at 16.) I want to know the best type so, when I build multi-integer arrays for various purposes, I don't pick an element type that causes a slow down, whether to focus on a fraction of a register (if the chosen type is too small) to handle two registers at once (if the chosen type is too large).
Giovanni answered:
A 32 bit integer *is* the best integer type for practically all 64 bit processor.
I'm going to disagree with Giovanni here. For Daryle's purposes 64 bit is better on a 64 bit platform. I'd like to call your attention to the study performed by gmp
Well, mine was an answer to the general question 'why int is not 64 bits on 64 bit platforms'. Of course an application may have its specific needs. -- gpd