On 05/27/2012 05:55 PM, Steven M. Schweda wrote:
> it's not immediately obvious (to me) that the
> code for two shifts and an OR will necessarily be more efficient (in
> space or time) than the code for an assignment
Any decent compiler will generate exactly the same
code for both. No shifts or O
From: Jim Meyering
> Thanks for confirming.
Glad to. It was (almost) the least I could do.
> Do you know of a modern optimizing compiler that fails
> to elide the dead code? If so, please let us know.
I realize that continuing this discussion is almost certainly
pointless, but, just for
I noticed that Emacs's configure script was checking for
-Wmultichar twice and tracked it down to a gnulib inefficiency,
fixed as follows.
---
ChangeLog |7 +++
m4/manywarnings.m4 |3 +--
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
ind
Steven M. Schweda wrote:
> From: Paul Eggert
>
>> I installed the following patch, which I hope fixes the problem. [...]
>
>It does around here.
Thanks for confirming.
> Thanks. I just hope that all the C
> preprocessors around the world appreciate all the work that you're
> saving them. It
From: Paul Eggert
> I installed the following patch, which I hope fixes the problem. [...]
It does around here. Thanks. I just hope that all the C
preprocessors around the world appreciate all the work that you're
saving them. It was educational for me, too. I'm beginning to see why
my old
