walter harms <wha...@bfs.de> writes: > 1. I do not want to start an argument here.
Your comments are welcome and helpful. > but i seems i need to explain what i wanted to say: > "b and c do not change inside the loop" > > that does *not* mean I have to say: const double or so. Right, the 'const' comment I made was purely about the attributes advertised of the 'pow' function from glibc -- a function marked like this: double mypow(double a, double b) __attribute__ ((const)); does allow the compiler to pull the computation out of the loop. However, glibc *doesn't* mark pow like this, so it isn't getting optimized as expected. > In my experience just moving that outside the loop give the > compiler enought insight. Yup, a patch that does that would be welcome. -- -keith
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
