On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 12:04:13AM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 04:50:24PM -0500, James Mastros wrote:
> > > Why? For at least x86, your way will be a lot slower.
> >
> > Maybe I should try to find out why Perl 5 does it like
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 04:50:24PM -0500, James Mastros wrote:
> Why? For at least x86, your way will be a lot slower.
Maybe I should try to find out why Perl 5 does it like that before making
such pronouncements. :)
Nick, any idea why Perl's abs doesn't use abs?
Simon
--
The primary differe
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 06:41:36PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> I'd prefer you did it the way Perl does it - if (foo < 0) foo = -foo;
Why? For at least x86, your way will be a lot slower.
-=- James Mastros
--
Put bin Laden out like a bad cigar:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 06:41:36PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> I'd like some abs ops so I can make the fp tests better, does
> the attached patch do the right thing? I'll commit tomorrow if
> no one complains.
I'd prefer you did it the way Perl does it - if (foo < 0) foo = -foo;
--
"Life sucks,
