lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41    [W:0.090 / U:0.776 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site