Am 12.12.2016 um 20:57 schrieb Jeff King:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 08:51:14PM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:
It's kinda cool to have a bespoke compatibility layer for major platforms,
but the more I think about it the less I can answer why we would want that.
Safety, reliability and performance can't be good reasons -- if our fallback
function lacks in these regards then we have to improve it in any case.
There may be cases that we don't want to support because of portability
issues. E.g., if your libc has an assembly-optimized qsort() we wouldn't
want to replicate that.
Offloading to GPUs might be a better example; I don't know of a libc
that does any of that, though (yet).
I dunno. I am not that opposed to just saying "forget libc qsort, we
always use our internal one which is consistent, performant, and safe".
But when I suggested something similar for our regex library, I seem to
recall there were complaints.
Well, I'm not sure how comparable they are, but perhaps we can avoid
compat code altogether in this case. Patch coming in a new thread.
René
