Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 20:08:39 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@FreeBSD.org>, arch@FreeBSD.org, "Sean C. Farley" <sean-freebsd@farley.org> Subject: Re: HEADS DOWN Message-ID: <20070509200000.B56490@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20070508222521.GA59534@nagual.pp.ru> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070509200000.B56490>