On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Le 28/03/2013 19:32, Jeff Trawick a écrit :

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Stefan Fritsch <sf@sfritsch.de> wrote:
On Monday 25 March 2013, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
As a first step, I noticed that apr_itoa, apr_ltoa, apr_off_t_toa
could  be tweaked to require less memory for some common cases.
The attached patch reduces memory use for small values, that is to
say  for strings that fit in 8 bytes (including NULL)
Looks like a reasonable optimization to me.

When shrinking it down to 8, why not avoid the apr_palloc altogether?
Also, how about lower-casing the name BUFFER_SIZE since it isn't

I'm not sure it is possible to avoid the call to apr_palloc.

You're correct, of course :)

For BUFFER_SIZE, I 100% agree with you. Previously it was a 'const int', and I just left it as it was.

There are also some tab vs space possible clean-up in these functions.

Finally, even if the 3 functions work the same way, they have different way to write it:
    *--start = '0' + (n % 10);
    *--start = (char)('0' + (n % 10));
    *--start = '0' + (char)(n % 10);
The 2nd version is, IMO, the best one.

preferred by me too

I didn't include it in my patch to reduce the differences.


Born in Roswell... married an alien...