Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Fourth release, requesting preliminary review again
From: Chad Nelson (chad.thecomfychair_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-06-10 15:27:36
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 06/10/2010 02:20 PM, Simonson, Lucanus J wrote:
> My experience with GMP has been that reusing existing GMP objects
> instead of declaring new ones was a significant performance
> enhancement. I don't think it is true that cost of operations is
> even greater than the cost of allocation, mush less significantly so,
> in general.
That depends on the size you're using and what you're doing with it. For
a 65-bit integer like you mentioned, doing nothing but addition and
subtraction, you're right. For a 4096-bit one using a lot of
exponentiation (think RSA encryption), the cost of the operations will
*definitely* outweigh the cost of allocation, and by such a large margin
that the allocation will be completely unnoticeable.
Most examples will fall somewhere between those two extremes.
> It is reasonable, particularly with fixed integer, to expect that the
> common case will be operations on a number of bits only slightly
> larger than the built in integer types support. If I need 65 bits
> (and I do) I will code it myself rather than pay for an allocation
> (and I did).
That's certainly a viable option, if you've got the luxury of the time
and interest to do it. Your average developer often doesn't, or values
his own time more than he needs efficiency in that part of his program.
The library is designed for large integers -- something that's usually
noticeably larger than 65 bits -- so it probably won't be optimal for
really small integers like that. It'll get the job done though, so I
don't consider that a problem.
> It isn't clear to me what fixed integer provides if it allocates on
> the heap. Why would anyone use it?
Because it simplifies his life. I can't predict what problems someone
might put it to, but I can imagine a few, such as emulating an old
mainframe or minicomputer that had an odd number of bits (I've heard of
computers with everything from seven to 36 bits, for instance). It was a
requested feature, and it required very little additional effort, so I
Oak Circle Software, Inc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk