Ian Rogers wrote: > Also agreed with everything above :-) One final thing is that the > final comparisons of == and < could be replaced with (NB. > -Integer.MIN_VALUE == Integer.MIN_VALUE): > > return (f1 >> 32) - (f2 >> 32) > > does anyone have a performance feeling about that?
:-) "a performance feeling" I'll defer to others, but I don't see much in it. I've committed the currently agreed optimization at r771716. Regards, Tim
