[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:54:00 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Current status: important changes since 0.9.11
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 09:49:42PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 07/19/2013 08:53 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> > However I do also agree with you, and think simplicity/consistency
> > possibly override reason #1 above, and #2 could easily be handled if
> > some time is put into review and testing of the new code.
> >
> > Anyone else have opinions on the matter?
>
> According to what you said pathological compilers would be the problem here.
Which comment are you referring to?
> Not sure which would be the performance impact of the change on good
> compilers though.
This is code that runs once at startup and has no loops. There's
really no way for it to be slow. The only issues are size and
correctness.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
