From owner-freebsd-current Tue Mar 20 17:26:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD3EC37B739 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:26:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2L1PU919996; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 18:25:30 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Message-Id: <200103210125.f2L1PU919996@harmony.village.org> To: "Michael C . Wu" Subject: Re: /bin/ls mb patch again Cc: thinker , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 20 Mar 2001 02:36:58 CST." <20010320023657.B47174@peorth.iteration.net> References: <20010320023657.B47174@peorth.iteration.net> <20010320163153.A14341@hell.branda.to> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 18:25:30 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20010320023657.B47174@peorth.iteration.net> "Michael C . Wu" writes: : Thinker thinks that memset() is too costly to use here : to modify one or two bytes. I agreed with him in that : filenames can't be that long to justify the memset() : overhead. However, with today's CPU power, I think : memset()'s overhead will only be noticeable with a : large directory filled with data. Please tell Thinker : what you think. It is mostly a conceptual thing. You are setting memory or copying memory. You should use the API for that rather than roll your own. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message