From owner-freebsd-chat  Tue May 28 15:14:37 1996
Return-Path: owner-chat
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA07329
          for chat-outgoing; Tue, 28 May 1996 15:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA07239
          for <chat@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 May 1996 15:14:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA11890; Tue, 28 May 1996 15:11:10 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199605282211.PAA11890@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: strcpy, strcat: not the same look & feel.
To: rnordier@iafrica.com (Robert Nordier)
Date: Tue, 28 May 1996 15:11:10 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, chat@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199605282108.XAA00428@eac.iafrica.com> from "Robert Nordier" at May 28, 96 11:08:25 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Any guesses what extra code the statement
> 
>    i++ N
> 
> would generate, if not a JMP?

I would think it could do an extra compare at the top if it reordered.

Of course, if it reordered, it wouldn't be doing extra stuff at all,
because the logic should be invertable by a peephole optimizer, if
you assume your compiler is any good at all.

The GCC numbers Bruce posted were, to say the least, a bit scary.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.