From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 31 22:43:02 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41E316A468; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:43:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from flata@magnesium.net) Received: from toxic.magnesium.net (toxic.magnesium.net [207.154.84.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ACC013C48E; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:43:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from flata@magnesium.net) Received: by toxic.magnesium.net (Postfix, from userid 1212) id 1C3ADDA8CF; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:43:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:43:13 -1000 From: Juli Mallett To: Andrey Chernov , Alexey Dokuchaev , Juli Mallett , src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <20071031224313.GA18285@toxic.magnesium.net> 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071031223727.GB90994@nagual.pp.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) Cc: Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include _ctype.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:43:02 -0000 * Andrey Chernov [ 2007-10-31 ] [ Re: cvs commit: src/include _ctype.h ] > 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). So if someone is trying to avoid compiler optimization bugs we should subject them to human optimization bugs instead? :) > 2. It also breaks common style ctype using for is{w}ascii(). If revert > this, is{w}ascii() should be rewritted too. That seems reasonable.