Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Path | csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:53:56 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <4F558A53.90500@SPAM.comp-arch.net> (permalink) |
| Date | Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:53:55 -0800 |
| From | "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| Reply-To | andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net |
| Organization | comp-arch.net |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: Hardware for linked lists |
| References | <J9R4r.11081$jU1.4604@newsfe08.iad> <464d29-qcc.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no> <4F543DC9.4060206@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| In-Reply-To | <4F543DC9.4060206@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| Lines | 34 |
| X-Usenet-Provider | http://www.giganews.com |
| X-Trace | sv3-Ml64O1qWnRgVgwsEvz5DRtGm7dEEwePK1OKlmPqETm6sn7ranBVJOpJNl5tSggYc0nYae0WJEcYAGTj!uRmwZ39A+c5FWS1ZD4W3fZ4vP4zXJLFO8MvnoWpUBUSbaK89qFAvdDXq5gCa |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@giganews.com |
| X-DMCA-Notifications | http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html |
| X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info | Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers |
| X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info | Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly |
| X-Postfilter | 1.3.40 |
| X-Original-Bytes | 2704 |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.arch:6273 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 3/4/2012 8:15 PM, Andy (Super) Glew wrote: > On 3/4/2012 1:41 PM, Terje Mathisen wrote: >> Robert Myers wrote: >>> http://www.futurechips.org/thoughts-for-researchers/quick-post-linked-lists.html >>> >>> "Should you ever use linked lists" (why not use arrays instead). > > Most programmers should not use either linked lists or arrays. They > should not use low level data structures. > > They should use higher level data structures. Something like C++ STL > list<T> or vector<T>. But ideally better - where the compiler and/or > runtime can look at how the accesses are being dome, and change the > underlying implementation to whatever is appropriate. > > --- > > By the way, I have many optimizations for linked lists in my toolbag. No > company has yet chosen to implement them, AFAIK. A topic close to my heart. The thing that I should have finished my Ph.D. on. Thinking about which led to my MLP (Memory Level Parallelism) talk. A few random points: (0) If you are building linked data structures inside arrays by using array indices - well, that is not very much different from using pointers, from the point of view of hardware optimizations. The indices may be smaller than pointers, and the objects are constrained to a smaller memory region - but they have the same issues. Arrays are only easier for hardware if accessed sequebntially, or in some other numerically regular pattern.
Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Hardware for linked lists Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2012-03-04 16:29 -0500
Re: Hardware for linked lists Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-04 22:41 +0100
Re: Hardware for linked lists "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-03-04 20:15 -0800
Re: Hardware for linked lists "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-03-05 19:53 -0800
Re: Hardware for linked lists Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-03-06 11:38 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-06 12:16 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2012-03-06 23:24 -0800
Re: Hardware for linked lists Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-07 09:08 +0100
Re: Hardware for linked lists Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-03-06 13:25 +0100
Re: Hardware for linked lists Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-06 17:11 +0100
Re: Hardware for linked lists nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-04 21:51 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2012-03-04 17:16 -0500
Re: Hardware for linked lists nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-04 23:15 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-03-04 17:04 -0700
Re: Hardware for linked lists nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-05 09:01 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-03-05 14:07 -0700
Re: Hardware for linked lists George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2012-03-05 00:57 -0500
Re: Hardware for linked lists cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net> - 2012-03-04 19:09 -0600
Re: Hardware for linked lists MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-04 18:24 -0800
Re: Hardware for linked lists Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2012-03-04 22:26 -0500
Re: Hardware for linked lists Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-03-05 03:59 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-03-04 23:38 -0500
Re: Hardware for linked lists Jim Haynes <jhaynes@alumni.uark.edu> - 2012-03-05 11:08 -0600
Re: Hardware for linked lists jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-03-05 22:21 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-05 15:14 -0800
Re: Hardware for linked lists John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2012-03-06 01:44 +0000
Re: Hardware for linked lists Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-06 00:41 -0800
Re: Hardware for linked lists torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2012-03-06 11:19 +0100
Re: Hardware for linked lists nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-06 11:07 +0000
csiph-web