subversion-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bert Huijben" <b...@qqmail.nl>
Subject RE: svn commit: r1694533 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_svn/marshal.c
Date Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:09:48 GMT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Branko ─îibej [mailto:brane@wandisco.com]
> Sent: woensdag 26 augustus 2015 10:19
> To: Subversion Development <dev@subversion.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1694533 -
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_svn/marshal.c
> 
> On 25.08.2015 23:08, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> >> All right, so I figured that the difference is that apr_array_make does
> >> two allocations compared to one in this code. Still: relying on
> >> knowledge of APR implementation details is a really bad idea.
> >
> > The structure definition of apr_array_header_t is part of
> > the public API, i.e. will never change.
> 
> The semantics might, even if the shape of the structure itself doesn't.


> I still think this kind of performance hack belongs in APR. Users that
> don't have a new-enough APR won't get the performance boost, but on the
> other hand, the kind of bug that started this discussion will stay out
> of our code.
> 
> I think we've had our fair share of alignment bugs with all the
> hand-crafted allocations etc.; we may as well stop now.

+1

	Bert


Mime
View raw message