git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
	Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
	Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] for_each_string_list_item(): behave correctly for empty list
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 10:38:39 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq4lryqhcw.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b03c7b09-853f-a2ed-f73e-7d946c90cedb@gmail.com> (Kaartic Sivaraam's message of "Tue, 19 Sep 2017 20:08:06 +0530")

Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> writes:

> On Saturday 16 September 2017 09:36 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>>> Does the following alternate fix work?  I think I prefer it because
>>> it doesn't require introducing a new global. [...]
>>>   #define for_each_string_list_item(item,list) \
>>> -	for (item = (list)->items; item < (list)->items + (list)->nr; ++item)
>>> +	for (item = (list)->items; \
>>> +	     (list)->items && item < (list)->items + (list)->nr; \
>>> +	     ++item)
>> This is the possibility that I was referring to as "add[ing] overhead to
>> each iteration of the loop". I'd rather not add an extra test-and-branch
>> to every iteration of a loop in which `list->items` is *not* NULL, which
>> your solution appears to do. Or are compilers routinely able to optimize
>> the check out?
>
> It seems at least 'gcc' is able to optimize this out even with a -O1
> and 'clang' optimizes this out with a -O2. Taking a sneak peek at
> the 'Makefile' shows that our default is -O2.

But doesn't the versions of gcc and clang currently available do the
right thing with the current code without this change anyway?  I've
been operating under the assumption that this is to future-proof the
code even when the compilers change to use the "NULL+0 is undefined"
as an excuse to make demons fly out of your nose, so unfortunately I
do not think it is not so huge a plus to find that the current
compilers do the right thing to the code with proposed updates.


  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-20  1:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-15 16:00 [PATCH] for_each_string_list_item(): behave correctly for empty list Michael Haggerty
2017-09-15 18:43 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-16  4:06   ` Michael Haggerty
2017-09-16 11:51     ` SZEDER Gábor
2017-09-17 10:19       ` Michael Haggerty
2017-09-19 14:38     ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-09-20  1:38       ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-09-20  1:43         ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-20  5:14           ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-20  2:30       ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-20  3:54         ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-20  5:27           ` [PATCH v2] for_each_string_list_item: avoid undefined behavior " Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-20  5:40             ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-20  7:00             ` Michael Haggerty
2017-09-20  7:40             ` Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-09-20 12:22             ` [PATCH v2] doc: camelCase the config variables to improve readability Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-09-20 16:28             ` [PATCH v2] for_each_string_list_item: avoid undefined behavior for empty list Andreas Schwab
2017-09-20 17:31               ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-09-20 21:51                 ` Andreas Schwab
2017-09-21  1:12                   ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-21 15:39                     ` Andreas Schwab
2017-09-20  7:35         ` [PATCH] for_each_string_list_item(): behave correctly " Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-09-17  0:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-17 10:24   ` Michael Haggerty
2017-09-18  0:37     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-09-19  0:08       ` Stefan Beller
2017-09-19  6:51         ` Michael Haggerty
2017-09-19 13:38           ` SZEDER Gábor
2017-09-19 13:45             ` SZEDER Gábor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqq4lryqhcw.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
    --cc=kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com \
    --cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
    --cc=raa.lkml@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).