From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Oct 31 16: 3:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C3B14E70 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 16:03:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA22994 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 01:03:36 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id BAA68276 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 01:03:36 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.nuxi.com (nuxi.cs.ucdavis.edu [169.237.7.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F7B14E70 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 16:03:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by relay.nuxi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA15795; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 16:02:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 16:02:55 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Dmitrij Tejblum Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: stpcpy() Message-ID: <19991031160255.E2388@relay.nuxi.com> Reply-To: obrien@NUXI.com References: <19991031145049.A90745@dragon.nuxi.com> <199910312349.CAA02684@tejblum.pp.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre1i In-Reply-To: <199910312349.CAA02684@tejblum.pp.ru> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.3-STABLE Organization: The NUXI BSD group X-PGP-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Keyid: 34F9F9D5 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 02:49:24AM +0300, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > > Bruce hit the nail right on the head -- people are making assumptions > > with out know what their compiler is doing. > > You omitted following Bruce's words: > > > > In practice, gcc seems to only inline strlen(). What does that have to do with the wisdom I was extracting from BDE's statements? A LOT of people are trying to optimize things with out knowing what their compiler does. > There is nothing that prevent to clone the highly optimized ASM strcpy() > to create a highly optimized ASM stpcpy(). Except most application developers don't make you build a new libc to add an ASM file they provide. > Really? Why? My colleagues use Windows and occasionally use stpcpy(), > just because it is CONVENIENT and obviously cannot make their program > slower. If the program is slower on FreeBSD (or even not compile), this is > not their fault. Bull crap. If an application writer uses non-standard functions it *is* their fault. -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message