On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 11:22:00AM -0400, Cristian Rodríguez wrote: > El 03/05/12 12:19, Miroslav Lichvar escribió: > > > > It makes the C function faster than the corresponding asm routine, so > > if it's included I'd suggest to just drop the asm function to not keep > > around more asm code than is necessary. > > With current compilers it is very likely that those routines are already > superflous.
It seems the current compilers are not that good yet :). In a test on a Core 2 machine with gcc-4.6.3, i686 flac build with nasm enabled is about 7% faster in decoding than without nasm. x86_64 build is about 2% faster than the i686 build with nasm enabled. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ flac-dev mailing list flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev