Numeric access to char
nobody at mailinator.com
Wed Aug 23 05:14:23 PDT 2006
Chad J wrote:
> nobody wrote:
>> So you will have to do it manually. I would like to suggest that if
>> you can pad the char to ensure its .length % 8 == 0 then you can
>> cast it to a ulong and your shifting will be faster.
> Sure about ulong? In my spare time I made my own minimal Bignum
> implementation. I'm not sure about shifts, but for addition with
> carrying it was faster to use size_t (uint in this case) rather than
> ulong. I wonder if maybe the compiler could optimize it better if it
> didn't have to emulate 64 bit integers. Or my benchmark was borked.
I certainly could be wrong but I would be quite surprised. I would be interested
to see what tests you ran that suggest addition with carry was faster.
More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn