Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
This may sound a bit ridicolous, however I wonder how serious you are
about the portability of the code used for libapr. Is it wanted that
compiler/llibrary internals of specific compilers are used? Or is that
considered a bug?

It needs to be portable ;-)

Seriously, if you have some way to make something a bazillion times faster by using a gcc extension then I suppose it might be considered, but you'd also have to provide a non-gcc version of the code for cases where that wasn't possible. People compile APR with all sorts of compilters.

-garrett

Reply via email to