From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ff6e0c3de8331c0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Harald Korneliussen <vintermann@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: sub-optimal code for packed boolean arrays -- bug or inherent
 limitation
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 00:22:56 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1183447376.437590.168620@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
References: <1183404856.375083.160890@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
   <0ehii.11343$Fc.5113@attbi_s21>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.184.192.82
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1183447376 15339 127.0.0.1 (3 Jul 2007 07:22:56
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 07:22:56 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <0ehii.11343$Fc.5113@attbi_s21>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; nb-NO;
 rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070515 Firefox/2.0.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=213.184.192.82;
   posting-account=5vUApw0AAADF5Kx_4-L9ZPdL9lZywYoQ
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16390
Date: 2007-07-03T00:22:56-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jul 3, 3:01 am, "Jeffrey R. Carter"
<spam.jrcarter....@acm.nospam.org> wrote:
> I doubt the compiler's code will make your chess
> program fail to meet its timing requirements; I doubt if you'll notice
> the difference at all, so I don't see why you care. If you must have a
> specific sequence of machine code operations, you should use a
> machine-code insertion.
>
Now now, chess programs written to compete with other chess programs
need all the performance they can get. You could argue that he should
be using C with inline assembly (and probably another compiler than
GCC), but wouldn't it be kind of neat if a competitive and readable
chess program was written in Ada? It would be a feather in the hat for
Ada's low-level features, which is what this is all about.

I would ask the GCC team, after looking at the intermediate code. I'm
sure they're not content with merely having the compiler generate
correct code.