From: "Marco Costalba" <mcostalba@gmail.com>
To: "Pierre Habouzit" <madcoder@debian.org>,
"Marco Costalba" <mcostalba@gmail.com>,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimize prefixcmp()
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:50:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e5bfff550712300650j2ea70032jaca893b734592184@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071230135820.GB25917@artemis.madism.org>
On Dec 30, 2007 2:58 PM, Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > This code doesn't work if prefix is "". You want something like:
> >
> > for (; *prefix; prefix++, str++) {
> > if (*str != *prefix)
> > return *(unsigned const char *)prefix - *(unsigned const char *)str;
> > }
> > return 0;
>
> Which happens to be basically the same than what Dscho wrote, though I
> suppose the compiler can compile that more efficiently than his code.
>
Yes, your version covers the *prefix == "" case too. If this case is
important for us we could use something as
static inline int prefixcmp(const char *str, const char *prefix)
{
do {
if (*str != *prefix)
return (!*prefix ? 0 : *(unsigned const char *)prefix - *(unsigned
const char *)str);
if (!*(++prefix))
return 0;
str++;
} while (1);
}
But your code is *surely* nicer then this one. But, for unknown
reasons, this code happens to be faster, probably as you say the
compiler optimizes away the second check in the return statement so
that this version is slightly faster then the 'for' loop one, but
admitelly we are going to much in the academic now.
If *prefix == "" case is to be considered I vote for your/Johannes
version because it's "better code" (tm).
Marco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-30 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-29 18:01 [PATCH] Speedup prefixcmp() common case Marco Costalba
2007-12-29 19:22 ` [PATCH] Optimize prefixcmp() Johannes Schindelin
2007-12-29 20:39 ` Marco Costalba
2007-12-29 22:15 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-12-29 22:44 ` Marco Costalba
2007-12-30 13:02 ` Marco Costalba
2007-12-30 13:55 ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-12-30 13:58 ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-12-30 14:50 ` Marco Costalba [this message]
2007-12-30 15:17 ` Marco Costalba
2007-12-30 15:54 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-12-29 21:54 ` Andy Parkins
2007-12-30 0:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-01-02 16:59 ` René Scharfe
2008-01-02 18:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-01-03 0:45 ` René Scharfe
2007-12-29 19:32 ` [PATCH] Speedup prefixcmp() common case Junio C Hamano
2007-12-29 20:14 ` Marco Costalba
2007-12-30 0:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-12-29 20:43 ` Marco Costalba
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e5bfff550712300650j2ea70032jaca893b734592184@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mcostalba@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madcoder@debian.org \
/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.
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).