Keep in mind that (a) a frequently used function like free() is likely
to be
in the cache, and
it simply doesnt matter if you cache the whole free() + data
or not as amount of cycles in less when spend on simple "if"
check than one or more enter/exit sequences + the same "if"
check. if you utilize or blow instruction/data cache/s or
not by calling free() is another measurement you can add or
sub to/from that but then again it doesnt matter, i simply
did mentioned that to point to the other side of the coin...
(b) duplicating the NULL check done inside free()
causes unnecessary bloat... which is an issue in embedded environments
where you don't always have a lot of memory.
which specific embedded environment ? i wouldnt call it
bloat since if you do a build for my mobile phone which
is few years old model it wont notice the difference :)
I was pointing it out because there are other places that free() gets
called
that is bracketed with an unnecessary NULL check.
the point is taken i just reckon we wasting time on this.
i would personally be fine with both takes as it doesnt
really matter that much to make any noticeable difference
imho, i would be more interested if somebody coded some
proper solution for bug 323064 with or without checks for
null pointers to free(). thats all i have to say on this.
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-ldap mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-ldap
