Re: [PATCH 3/3] match_basename: use strncmp instead of strcmp

On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:50:04PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: At the same time, I wonder if we can take advantage of the fact that these call sites only care about equality and not ordering. I did an RFC-patch for that (that I mistakenly didn't sent as a reply to this e-mail). And I believe

Re: [PATCH 3/3] match_basename: use strncmp instead of strcmp

On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com writes: strncmp provides length information, compared to strcmp, which could be taken advantage by the implementation. Even better, we could check if the lengths are equal before

[PATCH 3/3] match_basename: use strncmp instead of strcmp

strncmp provides length information, compared to strcmp, which could be taken advantage by the implementation. Even better, we could check if the lengths are equal before calling strncmp, eliminating a bit of strncmp calls. before after user0m0.519s0m0.489s user0m0.521s

Re: [PATCH 3/3] match_basename: use strncmp instead of strcmp

Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com writes: strncmp provides length information, compared to strcmp, which could be taken advantage by the implementation. Even better, we could check if the lengths are equal before calling strncmp, eliminating a bit of strncmp calls. I think I am a bit