Yep, Tim, you're right. I believe that new implementation fixes a number of bugs and will try to get it not degrading. I just want to maintain the performance level of current trunk on the same level, gradually fixing functional bugs. I don't like to sacrifice performance of HEAD revision for non-critical bugfix. That is, I want to see HEAD changes like this:
"high performance, minor bug -> high performance, no bugs" rather than "high performance, minor bug -> low performance, no bugs -> high performance, no bugs" ...because anyone could get the HEAD Harmony revision for performance measurements at any time. What do you think? Thanks, Aleksey, ESSD, Intel. On Jan 14, 2008 6:43 PM, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I agree that performance is important, it is not the only > consideration. If this patch fixes a number of bugs then it should be > considered on that merit, and we should look into retrieving the > performance numbers on a more capable implementation.
