On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 around 18:25:46 +0100, antirez wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 04:11:46PM +0100, Jakob ?stergaard wrote:
> > On most processors <<2 is slower than *4. It's outright stupid to
> > write <<2 when we mean *4 in order to optimize for one out of a
> > gazillion supported architectures - even more so when the compiler
> > for the one CPU where <<2 is faster, will actually generate a shift
> > instead of a multiply as a part of the standard optimization.
>
> Hug, ok, so all the << 2 already in should be changed in *4.
> My point is that it is better to use only << 2 or *4, selecting
> the better form.
Well, better not change things so they look like:
#define MSG_BLA1 (1<<1)
#define MSG_BLA2 (1*4)
#define MSG_BLA3 (1<<3)
as a result... :)
Met vriendelijke groet,
Pauline Middelink
--
GPG Key fingerprint = 2D5B 87A7 DDA6 0378 5DEA BD3B 9A50 B416 E2D0 C3C2
For more details look at my website http://www.polyware.nl/~middelink
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
