Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 14:01:04 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: byteswap.h On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 07:53:09PM +0200, fab10 wrote: > I had a look at byteswap.h and it seems to me that the code is not > very efficient. Every function in this header could be translated in > a single assembly instruction with the gcc intrinsics: > > __builtin_bswap16 > __builtin_bswap32 > __builtin_bswap64 > > Is there a reason to not use these gcc intrinsics? Because the compile should be (and as far as I know, is) generating the optimal single instructions from the portable C, without the need for hackish non-portable intrinsics. 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.