On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:39:16 +0200 "Cedric BAIL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:15 PM, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, 03 Apr 2008 21:25:05 +0200 Kim Woelders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled: > > > Cedric BAIL wrote: > > > > So here are some patch that should not break edje too much. > > > > > > > > 0001 and 0002: Replace call to snprintf by using memcpy or some kind of > > > > itoa. > > > > > > Is this really worth while? Possibly a small speedup at the cost of > > > considerably more and considerably uglier code? > > I could perhaps clean a little bit the code, but using snprintf when > only memcpy is really required slow thing down (around 5% of my time > lost in snprintf, with modification 0.1% in memcpy and 1% in > snprintf). It's definitively a win. A minimal one, but a win. > > > i've reverted them anyway.. b0rks. :( > > I believe only 0004 should be risky, the other shouldn't be risky. But > as it break illumine. I should try it. Do you have a tarball, an url > or something for this stuff ? yup. 0004 breaks illume. others in, but 0004 left out :) -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
