[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51E99856.3030504@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:49:42 +0200
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Current status: important changes since 0.9.11
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.
Not sure which would be the performance impact of the change on good
compilers though.
The safest route is to keep around the assembly that works or benchmark
and replace if the result doesn't change much.
lu
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.
