On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 11:56:48PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >... > You were discussing the possibility of parsing for <!--# as a skip by 5. > > Consider jumping to a 4 byte alignment, truncating to char and skip by > dwords. E.g., you only have to test for three values, not four, and you > can use the machine's most optimal path. But I'd ask if strstr() isn't > optimized on the platform, why are we reinventing it? strstr() can't find strings that span a bucket boundary. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
- remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Brian Pane
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Justin Erenkrantz
- mod_include.c WAS: RE: remaining CPU bottlen... Sander Striker
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 William A. Rowe, Jr.
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Greg Stein
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Brian Pane
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Brian Pane
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Justin Erenkrantz
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Ian Holsman
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Justin Erenkrantz
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Aaron Bannert
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 dean gaudet
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Brian Pane
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 William A. Rowe, Jr.
- Re: remaining CPU bottlenecks in 2.0 Brian Pane
