From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Karl =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hasselstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: [RFC] Convert builin-mailinfo.c to use The Better String Library. Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 14:55:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20070907125501.GA21142@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk> References: <1189004090.20311.12.camel@hinata.boston.redhat.com> <4AFD7EAD1AAC4E54A416BA3F6E6A9E52@ntdev.corp.microsoft.com> <46E0EEC6.4020004@op5.se> <46E13C0F.8040203@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Andreas Ericsson , Johannes Schindelin , Dmitry Kakurin , Linus Torvalds , Matthieu Moy , Git To: Wincent Colaiuta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Sep 07 14:56:03 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ITdNG-00070P-Dj for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:55:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965305AbXIGMzp convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 08:55:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965280AbXIGMzp (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 08:55:45 -0400 Received: from diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk ([80.68.90.142]:3374 "EHLO diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965132AbXIGMzo (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 08:55:44 -0400 Received: from kha by diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1ITdMT-0005fM-00; Fri, 07 Sep 2007 13:55:01 +0100 Mail-Followup-To: Wincent Colaiuta , Andreas Ericsson , Johannes Schindelin , Dmitry Kakurin , Linus Torvalds , Matthieu Moy , Git Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Manual-Spam-Check: kha@treskal.com, clean User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 2007-09-07 14:33:42 +0200, Wincent Colaiuta wrote: > Well, you picked a very specific algorithm amenable to that kind of > optimization: small, manageable, with a minimal and well-defined > performance critical section that could be written in assembly. Note > how a good chunk of the implementation was still in C. And this is of course exactly the kind of spot where you _would_ use assembly in the real world. 99.99% of code is better written in C than assembler, but there is that 0.01% where hand-coded assembler is a better choice. --=20 Karl Hasselstr=F6m, kha@treskal.com www.treskal.com/kalle