> Honestly, I am not really in favor of this from the perspective that it
> is a poor library API.  It does nothing to improve correctness and
> actually opens the door for developers to use the static checking
> version in a context where run-time errors may occur.  I would rather
> first see some benchmark numbers showing how the new version performs
> better.  Here, performance seems like another windmill. ;)

I never intended to commit this patch, it was just to illustrate that
that runtime checks and asserts are not mutually exclusive.

Whether it makes sense to expose bare-metal versions of certain
API fn's will only be decided *after* I present performance #'s to back
it up.


--
Øyvind Harboe
Embedded software and hardware consulting services
http://consulting.zylin.com
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to