- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:02:28 -0800
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Monday 2009-02-02 10:53 -0800, L. David Baron wrote: > No, we're not using strcmp() in our code today, because it's too > slow. We're doing atomization of many things to make comparison > faster than strcmp. > Most string comparisons fail, so failing quickly is significantly > more important than succeeding quickly. For what it's worth, I'm aware that these statements somewhat contradict each other. Maybe we don't win as much from atomization as we think, although I suspect there may be performance benefits derived from code size reductions (since a single word comparison is smaller than a function call or an inlined strcmp). Or maybe string comparisons succeeding quickly is important too. (But failing quickly is still *more* important.) -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Monday, 2 February 2009 19:03:33 UTC