From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-23 13:30:40
On Thursday, January 23, 2003, at 07:14 PM, Dan Gohman wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> The reason for special-casing the Cray X1 here is so that int_fast16_t
> isn't defined to be short, as short has performance penalties
> associated
> with it on this platform.
Hi Dan,
I missed that point. Yes, you are right int_fast16_t should be int on
the X1.
I guess we could also define it as short on the SV1 and other machnes
with 32 bit shorts. Unfortunately there is no 16 bit integer type on
those machines.
Matthias