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=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,99a6311c4195e21b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Matrix Multiplication
Date: 1999/12/19
Message-ID: <83hic5$evh$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 562447592
References: <9BBB0C9AF506D311A68E00902745A537C236B1@fsxqpz04.usafa.af.mil>
 <60l838.ocd.ln@ds9.klebsch.de>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x23.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Dec 19 03:11:04 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-12-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <60l838.ocd.ln@ds9.klebsch.de>,
  mario@klebsch.de (Mario Klebsch) wrote:
> "Carlisle, Martin" <Martin.Carlisle@usafa.af.mil> writes:
>
> >The idea that matrix multiplication would always be inlined
seems absurd to
> >me.  The simple implementation has O(n^3) running time.
>
> What about compiling for a CPU, that does have an instruction
for
> matrix multiplication? It seems absurd to me, not to use that
> instruction, if it is available.


It may seem absurd, but it is likely the case that if you DO
have such an instruction it should not be used in many cases.
The secret of reasonably efficient code for modern CISC machines
is often to ignore many of the junk instructions (this is for
sure true on the Pentium for example!)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.