On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Patchwatcher notes that the conformance test fails here:
> Also: did you benchmark this change to verify it actually made > things faster? Unrolling loops is no longer as sure-fire a win as > it used to be. I'm inclined to prefer the more compact, clear > loop unless there's hard evidence it's > 1% slower. > - Dan > I'de bet good money that GCC already unrolled those loops with -O2 and greater. I do agree with Dan though that doing a test on a standard intel core machine and a k8 machine to see what reality looks like is best.
