From owner-cvs-all Wed Mar 20 17:14:21 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A91C37B400; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 17:14:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10906; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:13:48 +1100 Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:13:59 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: To: Mark Murray Cc: , Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/camcontrol camcontrol.c modeedit.c src/sbin/dumpfs dumpfs.c src/sbin/fsck_ffs dir.c fsutil.c inode.c pass1.c pass1b.c pass2.c pass4.c pass5.c preen.c setup.c In-Reply-To: <200203202307.g2KN7C4j076159@grimreaper.grondar.org> Message-ID: <20020321120948.Q12290-100000@gamplex.bde.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Mark Murray wrote: > > > "register" -- just how many free registers do people think machines have?) > > > > Most machines designed after 1978 (8?) other than i386's have many. > > Programmers declared almost all local variables as register to encourage the > > compiler to keep as many as possible in registers. > > This is the same kind of thinking that resulted in sales-idiots at my > previous orkplace routinely marking all mail as "urgent". > > How can any system decide on the order of items if their declared > priority is the same? By not declaring all items with the same priority. The most natural prioritization convention is to declare things with highest priority first and allocate registers in the same order. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message