apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Woolley <jwool...@virginia.edu>
Subject Re: apr_pcalloc resulting in segfault
Date Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:16:05 GMT
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Sander Striker wrote:

> Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > I really don't think we should take a function like apr_pcalloc and
> > convert it to a macro.  The only reason to go to a macro is for
> > performance reasons.  First, the performance boost should be
> > relatively minimal, and for anybody who needs it, they can use
> > apr_palloc and memset themselves.
>
> apr_pcalloc has been a macro for a very very long time now.  The
> performance boost was significant is my recollection.  This is why
> we converted to the macro.

... the reason for which would have been that memset's of a fixed length
that is known at compile time can be optimized.  If pcalloc is a macro,
and the length argument to pcalloc is a constant, then having pcalloc as a
macro means that the compiler will be able to see that constant for what
it is.

Mime
View raw message