| |||||||||||||
Pettenò: Debunking x32 mythsPettenò: Debunking x32 mythsPosted Jun 26, 2012 20:36 UTC (Tue) by butlerm (subscriber, #13312)In reply to: Pettenò: Debunking x32 myths by Flameeyes Parent article: Pettenò: Debunking x32 myths
>Spec2k makes wide use of long where int (or properly sized stdints) should be used
It sounds like Spec2k should be rewritten to use int32_t instead of int, and int64_t instead of long, in any places where this might make a significant difference.
(Log in to post comments)
Pettenò: Debunking x32 myths Posted Jun 26, 2012 20:58 UTC (Tue) by Flameeyes (subscriber, #51238) [Link]
Yes, too bad that it's a quite secretive and closed-source benchmark, which is my first problem with the benchmark's numbers — took quite a bit of investigative work to actually find somebody who could confirm my hunch about longs.
Pettenò: Debunking x32 myths Posted Jun 27, 2012 3:11 UTC (Wed) by slashdot (guest, #22014) [Link]
You can apparently download an unlicensed copy for free from http://ks.tier2.hep.manchester.ac.uk/Mirrors/SPEC_CPU2006... and probably other places.
|
|||||||||||||