Re: sizeof bool > sizeof int ?!?

[Richard Hadsell <hadsell at blueskystudios dot com>]

Richard Hadsell wrote:
> 
> I realize that some (all?) alpha processors do not handle 1-byte data
> efficiently.  I hope that the situation will change with future
> versions.  But it's hard to believe that alphas don't have an efficient
> instruction set for (4-byte) int data.  What about short data?  Are they
> handled as badly as 1-byte data?
> 
> I would prefer that bool be implemented with the best performance in
> mind, including the effects of using memory efficiently, too.

I haven't seen any comments from the compiler group on their decision to
implement bool as an 8-byte datum on alphas.  If the performance is so
much better that it is worth the cost in memory usage, why is an int
only 4 bytes.  Since the standard allows it to be as big as a long, why
not?  I thought that we could expect an int to be whatever size gives
the best integer performance.

So I don't understand why a bool is any longer than an int.  What other
considerations were there in making the decision?

-- 
Dick Hadsell			914-381-8400 x5446 Fax: 914-381-9790
Reply-to:			hadsell@blueskystudios.com
Blue Sky | VIFX                 http://www.bluesky-vifx.com
1 South Road, Harrison, NY 10528