Transaction

j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckMê<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=753.msg8388#msg8388">Quote from: satoshi on August 09, 2010, 06:50:41 PM</a></div><div class="quote">I found that SSE2 only added a slight speedup, about 2%, which didn't seem worth the incompatibility.&nbsp; <br/></div>I do the see point because a non-SSE2 machine, the client would crash?<br/><div class="quoteheader">Quote</div><div class="quote">It doesn't look to me like Crypto++ could be deciding whether to use SSE2 at runtime.&nbsp; There's one place where it detects SSE2 for deciding some block count parameter, but the SSE2 stuff is all #ifdef at compile time and I can't see how that would switch at runtime.&nbsp; Maybe I'm not looking in the right place.<br/><br/>Should we enable SSE2 in all the makefiles?&nbsp; It seems like we must in case someone compiles with 64-bit.<br/><br/>I will recompile the 64-bit part of the Linux 0.3.8 release.<br/></div>Depends on which is easier really. If you enable something that is going to break compatibility, the only people who will feel the pain are the non-technical users of the client. From their perspective, it just doesn't work for some reason.<br/><br/>I think some builds notes would be better, example (If compiling on a 64bit system, be sure to do this part).<br/><br/>Have one branch of source that cross-compiles across multiple operating systems is always tricky business.&nbsp; <img alt="Grin" border="0" src="/static/img/emoticons/grin.gif"/></div> text/html