Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:12:06 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: Patch to remove undefined C code |
| |
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Mike Castle wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 04:47:09PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > > tmp = *p++; > > *q = f(tmp, *p++); > > return p; > > > > is equivalent to more idiomatic > > > > *q = f(p[0], p[1]); > > return p+2; > > > Which gets better assembler out of various versions of gcc?
On which platform? If it would be VAX - sure, autoincrement rocks, but for something like x86 I would expect the second form to do better. Besides, it's more readable and is harder to fsck up when you are modifying the code.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |