Hi.
Paul Eggert <egg...@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
> On 10/1/18 11:31 AM, arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
> > Those changes look really excessive to me. I prefer to not have to
> > keep including more and more files from gnulib just to compile regex
> > or dfa.
>
> Sorry, I didn't read your message (I had misfiled it) until just now,
Oops.
> after I propagated the patch into glibc. So now I will have to go into
> repair mode....
Is the patch also in gnulib?
> I would rather minimize the difference from glibc. Is this the only
> place where the Gawk regex code departs from the Gnulib copy? If so,
> let's try to come up with a way to keep the source identical, if only by
> using "#ifdef _LIBC" or "#ifdef GAWK" or whatever.
In my custom.h, I have added
/* This keeps regex happy on non-GCC compilers */
#ifndef __GNUC__
#ifndef __builtin_expect
#define __builtin_expect(expr, val) (expr)
#endif
I did not actually change the regex files.
> > (As a side point, does all the __builtin_expect / __glibc_unlikely
> > stuff *really* make that much difference? It sure clutters up
> > the code unmercifully.)
>
> I agree. I don't think they make much performance difference nowadays. I
> plan to time them and see if we're right; if so, let's get rid of them
> (in glibc regex, Gnulib, and in Gawk).
So, let's wait until the results of all this. Once you update regex
in Gnulib I will sync with it.
Thanks,
Arnold
