apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@apache.org>
Subject Re: apr_token_* conclusions
Date Tue, 01 Dec 2015 06:41:20 GMT
On 01.12.2015 05:31, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> That describes the 'token' use case, right?  While MMX operands let
> the clib devs play with 16-byte/dword/word units, we are principally
> looking at very short strings.  As soon as you do a 16 byte compare
> w/delimiting the null byte, your optimization is lost.
>
> I think we are of one mind on this, sniping aside.  I started with an
> svn cp today from asf subversion, and chose to focus on only the
> svn_cstring_ (excluding svn_string and svn_stringbuf ops), but there
> is room if we give the nod and should treat them as 3 seperate
> groupings.  First commit inbound in the morning with lots of room for
> optimization.
>

Ack. I think svn_string, and certainly svn_stringbuf, are out of scope
for APR.

-- Brane

Mime
View raw message