"Derek R. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm curious why you say it will take a little longer to run. I
> > assumed we'd just treat the absence of an explicit port number as
> > being like an explicit 2401. That shouldn't require more than a few
> > nanoseconds of overhead... Or is there an issue I'm missing here?
>
> Each line in .cvspass was previously undergoing a simple strcmp against the
> current CVSROOT. I'm going to have to parse each line and normalize then
> compare.
Oh, I see. Yes, more time to a machine, but not noticeable at human
speeds (that's all I was concerned with).
Thanks,
-Karl
_______________________________________________
Bug-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
