From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 1 02:22:46 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DA416A418 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2007 02:22:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CD01213C494 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2007 02:22:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Nov 2007 01:55:40 -0000 Received: from p54A3EA53.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO tron.homeunix.org) [84.163.234.83] by mail.gmx.net (mp001) with SMTP; 01 Nov 2007 02:55:40 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1673122 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+de3Z3qyWdr07/t7V43JD+xnR8PTRgHtNmYQnH+p L2Y5mecwG8v8/P Message-ID: <4729321B.8030809@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:55:39 +0100 From: Christoph Mallon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070806) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrey Chernov , Alexey Dokuchaev , Juli Mallett , src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200710272232.l9RMWSbK072082@repoman.freebsd.org> <20071030200331.GA29309@toxic.magnesium.net> <20071031215526.GC89932@nagual.pp.ru> <20071031223349.GA552@FreeBSD.org> <20071031223727.GB90994@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <20071031223727.GB90994@nagual.pp.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include _ctype.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:22:46 -0000 Andrey Chernov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:33:49PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >>> For ones who doubts there two tests compiled with -O2. As you may see the >>> result is almost identical (andl vs cmpl): >> Q.E.D. How about to restore original, more reader-friendly version then? > > 1. Reader-friendly version generates long code when absolutely no > optimization used in compiler (for some reason f.e. to avoid optimization > bugs). Code with "absolutely no optimization" is slow for many other reasons. > 2. It also breaks common style ctype using for is{w}ascii(). If revert > this, is{w}ascii() should be rewritted too. I think, the latter is a good suggestion. Christoph