Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 12:09:23 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org> 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 Message-ID: <20020321120259.U12290-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20020320145618.B87429@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 09:03:54AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > > > Log: > > > Remove 'register' keyword. > > > It does not help modern compilers, and some may take some hit from it. > > > (I also found several functions that listed *every* of its 10 local vars with > > > "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. > > The key word I used was _FREE_, as in not being used for temparies, and > other operations. :-) This is not very different for a compiler that does stupid register allocation. Most operations only take 2 or 3 registers, so there are usually 13 or 14 free on machines with 16 general registers. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020321120259.U12290-100000>