> All of the assumptions looks sane to me. > > It is basically the question of code quality vs. some speed increase for > using SSE code for unaligned buffers for some amount of users. > If we decide that former is more important, : > > - No code duplication. > - No *C++11 Lambdas* are needed to avoid code duplication. > - We can also get rid of *_Select_* helper functions. > - Probably no bump to C++11, not sure. >[...] > So yes, *i* believe we can simplify it by removing wrappers around SSE for > unaligned buffers, > adding checking for proper alignment and falling back to non SSE code. > > However final decision is yours to make. > I will change my (and all other LF code, if needed) in the needed way, > depending on the final decision. >
Then I think we should remove SSE code for unaligned memory and state in the documentation that SSE is only available for aligned memory. I will await your changes on github before I merge the new SSE code to sourceforge master. Sebastian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho _______________________________________________ Lensfun-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lensfun-users
