> Hello,
>
> I'd be concerned about (s1 != s2). Depending on how efficiently this
> compiles, could not branch prediction make this faster for match vs. not
> match, etc?. I'd be worried about all the ways (and future ways) compilers
> might help us and introduce time differences.
I was avoiding suggesting new conditionals for that reason, but didn't
see the one already there. Good find.
>
> I'd feel most comfortable with the time delay, but why not stick to complete
> artithmetic?
I agree. But I think you've inverted the return value (strcmp returns
0 on perfect match).
>
>
> int i;
> int acc = 0;
>
> for(i=0;i<MAX_LEN;i++,s1++,s2++)
> {
> acc |= (*s1 ^ *s2);
>
> if (*s1 == 0)
> break;
> }
>
> return (acc == 0);
>
>
> Also, these strcmp functions don't properly return < or >. Just = / !=.
> However, my context being so new is quite limited.
>
>
> Darron
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
