Am 26.03.2010 01:55, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:55, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Am 25.03.2010 18:19, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
Am 24.03.2010 09:24, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
Very minor optimizations. Barely worth doing.
Note my removal of the need to have n++ inside
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:55, Ulf Zibis wrote:
> Am 25.03.2010 18:19, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
>>
>> Am 24.03.2010 09:24, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
>>
>>> Very minor optimizations. Barely worth doing.
>>> Note my removal of the need to have n++ inside the loop.
>>
>> Overseen. Shame on me, as that's tr
Am 25.03.2010 18:19, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
Am 24.03.2010 09:24, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
Very minor optimizations. Barely worth doing.
Note my removal of the need to have n++ inside the loop.
Overseen. Shame on me, as that's true Ulf-style. Yes, reduces
in/decrements on rare supplementary case
