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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	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!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: sub-optimal code for packed boolean arrays -- bug or inherent
	limitation
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.tsoh+bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
In-Reply-To: <1183447376.437590.168620@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
References: <1183404856.375083.160890@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
	 <0ehii.11343$Fc.5113@attbi_s21>
	 <1183447376.437590.168620@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1183451830.7103.3.camel@kartoffel>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:37:10 +0200
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 03 Jul 2007 10:36:39 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 424205b3.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=DUBh>DY8YUi:i=48;n?Z:`4IUK<Cl32<a4Fo<]lROoRagUcjd<3m<;bPH:a3g3^Ska=kbmW`a1fGgC`2T@AUZfCk0TYB3R\2@Pl
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16392
Date: 2007-07-03T10:36:39+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 00:22 -0700, Harald Korneliussen wrote:
> 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?

Clear Ada is the point of this Ada program as the OP has explained
on the GCC mailing list.


> 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.

The suggestion was different. Still, the problem is identified
as non-optimal code.