From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May  9 10:08:49 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: arch@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A56116A403;
	Wed,  9 May 2007 10:08:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from mailout2.pacific.net.au (mailout2-3.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.226])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D7113C448;
	Wed,  9 May 2007 10:08:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (mailproxy1.pacific.net.au
	[61.8.2.162])
	by mailout2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE4D10D38D;
	Wed,  9 May 2007 20:08:33 +1000 (EST)
Received: from besplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id D529B8C20;
	Wed,  9 May 2007 20:08:39 +1000 (EST)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 20:08:39 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org
To: Andrey Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070508222521.GA59534@nagual.pp.ru>
Message-ID: <20070509200000.B56490@besplex.bde.org>
References: <20070502230413.Y30614@thor.farley.org>
	<20070503160351.GA15008@nagual.pp.ru>
	<20070504085905.J39482@thor.farley.org>
	<20070504213312.GA33163@nagual.pp.ru>
	<20070504174657.D1343@thor.farley.org>
	<20070505213202.GA49925@nagual.pp.ru>
	<20070505163707.J6670@thor.farley.org>
	<20070505221125.GA50439@nagual.pp.ru>
	<20070506091835.A43775@besplex.bde.org>
	<20070508162458.G6015@baba.farley.org>
	<20070508222521.GA59534@nagual.pp.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@FreeBSD.org>, arch@FreeBSD.org,
	"Sean C. Farley" <sean-freebsd@farley.org>
Subject: Re: HEADS DOWN
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 10:08:49 -0000

On Wed, 9 May 2007, Andrey Chernov wrote:

> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 04:37:03PM -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote:
>>  Would it be preferred to go ahead to use strlen() in preparation for a
>>  faster strlen() in the future?
> ...
> we can use strlen() in preparation for the future.

Yes, it is better to use library functions if they do (almost) exactly what
is wanted.

>>  I would still use the inline'd version
>>  when counting characters while watching for an '=' character.  Or should
>>  it also be changed to perform a strlen() and then a strchr()?
>
> Combined strlen()+strchr() will be slower in any case than single loop, so
> better leave it as is.

The compiler could in theory reduce to a single loop, but I've never seen
one that does and would use the loop myself.

Bruce