Hi Bulat, On Apr 9, 2006, at 6:31 AM, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
on the other side, these procedures can use the same divide-to-bytes technique as `size`
findMinIndex 0 = undefined findMinIndex n = case (n `shiftR` 8) of 0 -> minIndexInByte ! (n .&. 255) b -> 8 + findMinIndex b
something like this should work
In an email to me, Jean-Philippe Bernardy expressed a concern that a large table could needlessly fill the data cache. He proposed checking 4 bits at a time and using a small table of 16 elements. Not surprisingly, it isn't as fast. I wonder what you think of this. Also, I wonder what would be a good test to demonstrate this possible interaction with the cache. Cheers, David ps. Thanks for the tip about UArray. -------------------------------- David F. Place mailto:d@vidplace.com