Re: cvs: php4 /ext/dba dba.c dba_cdb.c dba_db2.c dba_db3.c dba_dbm.c dba_flatfile.c dba_gdbm.c dba_ndbm.c

At 13:37 13.11.2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:

On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Marcus Börger wrote: At 18:59 06.11.2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:

sas             Wed Nov  6 12:59:04 2002 EDT

Modified files:

    /php4/ext/dba       dba.c dba_cdb.c dba_db2.c dba_db3.c dba_dbm.c
                        dba_flatfile.c dba_gdbm.c dba_ndbm.c

Log: emalloc never returns 0, so we can simplify the code paths. also replace ecalloc with emalloc+memset, so that the latter can be inlined.

Could you explain what you meant with the second part? ecmalloc is a call that uses memset. If memset can be inlined it would be inlined in ecalloc as well as in the other place. In other words i do not see the difference.

    The difference is the placement of the memset call.  After
    the changes, a compiler which does not optimize across
    function borders can inline the memset call (e.g. GCC).
    memset() is a lot faster, if the compiler knows the size of
    the data field.

You're right the compiler knows the size in the caller function but not in ecalloc of cause. Shouldn't then ecalloc be a compiler define? #define ecalloc(num, size) \ memset( emalloc(num*size), 0, num*size) marcus

Have a look at the assembler code here

    http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@httpd.apache.org/msg02492.html

    - Sascha

-- PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php