Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.En?dian comments
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-06 09:37:40
>> Impressively, on system B gcc is able to recognise that that expression
>> is implemented by the rev instruction.
>> On system A, the expected logical instructions are generated and they
>> are faster than the bytewise loads and stores that Beman's code
>> produces. Based on the similar speed, my guess is that this code is
>> similar to what htonl() does.
> i would assume that this algorithm is way more friendly for out-of-order
> machines as it is should make use of instruction level parallelism.
> it might be hard to verify the benefit with a synthetic benchmark, though ...
I'm working on a benchmark that tries to mimic real-world use cases.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk